[On Statistical Underreporting of Norovirus-Infections: Insights from Register Data of Two Local Public Health Authorities]. / Zur statistischen Untererfassung von Norovirus-Infektionen: Erkenntnisse aus Daten von zwei Gesundheitsämtern.

BACKGROUND: Only laboratory-confirmed norovirus (NoV) cases have to be notified to the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) since 2011, but not other, e. g. clinical-epidemiological cases. It can be assumed that the extent of underreporting of NoV cases in Germany has significantly increased since then. OBJECTIVES: To discuss the extent of underreporting, we wanted to find out how many laboratory tests were carried out during gastroenteritis outbreaks. Furthermore, the significance of NoV outbreaks in occupational health is discussed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of all pseudonymized gastroenteritis outbreak data reported to 2 local health authorities between 2011 and 2015, the proportion of NoV outbreaks and reported cases of infection among employees in hospitals and community facilities (nursing homes for the elderly, day-care centers, schools) confirmed by laboratory tests was calculated retrospectively. RESULTS: Only a few gastroenteritis outbreaks in day-care centers were etiologically diagnosed, so that only 6% and less could be classified as NoV outbreaks. In nursing homes for the elderly, about half of the outbreaks were classified as NoV, in hospitals almost all of them. Employees accounted for up to 23% of those affected in NoV outbreaks. CONCLUSIONS: The low level of laboratory diagnostics carried out during gastroenteritis outbreaks in day-care centers suggests a considerable number of hidden NoV cases. The significant proportion of staff relative to the total number of infected persons during the outbreaks highlights the importance of the burden of NoV outbreaks as a topic in occupational health. Further, large-scale prospective studies are needed to empirically substantiate these initial findings.

Significance of norovirus in occupational health: a review of published norovirus outbreaks in Central and Northern Europe.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, norovirus (NoV) is the leading cause of gastroenteritis infection among all ages. The development of prevention strategies in the field of occupational health requires a detailed knowledge about the impact of the disease on employees. This review article aims not only at evaluating the burden of NoV outbreaks on staff but also at discussing implications for future prevention strategies. METHODS: Published NoV outbreaks in Central and Northern Europe were identified via a systematic literature search. Additionally, published NoV outbreaks in Germany were detected via a manual literature search. Key epidemiological data, as the number of symptomatic staff, was then extracted. The proportion of affected employees was calculated for each dataset (single NoV outbreaks or aggregated data of multiple outbreaks). RESULTS: Overall, 116 datasets were extracted from 72 relevant articles. 144,852 persons were affected by NoV gastroenteritis, 25,408 out of them (17.5%) were employees. 23,874 (94.0%) of them fell sick during outbreaks in hospitals and related settings. NoV cases among personnel in food establishments were reported only sporadically (mean ratio: 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Employees in hospitals and community facilities seem quantitatively to be most vulnerable towards NoV epidemics. Therefore, high quality of prevention measures in these settings, respective compliance with prevention strategies should have the highest priority. The disease can be considered as an occupational disease, even regularly without long-term consequences. Following work safety rules, a vaccination for vulnerable groups should be recommended if the vaccine development turns out to be successful.

Challenges in Infection Epidemiology: On the Underreporting of Norovirus Gastroenteritis Cases in Germany.

It is commonly accepted that the number of officially reported incidences of norovirus (NoV) according to the German Protection against Infection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz) does not reflect the 'true' incidence of NoV in Germany. This study aims to reveal the reasons for the underreporting of NoV cases by comparing secondary data. METHODS: NoV incidence (cases per 100,000 reference persons) in the age group 18-65 was derived from register data of four different sources in the German public health system (2011-2015): Statutory health insurance in the federal state of Lower Saxony (AOK; in- and outpatient cases), the Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany (ZI; outpatient cases), the German Federal Statistical Office (inpatient cases; DESTATIS), and the Robert Koch Institute (RKI SurvStat; health reporting data). RESULTS: the incidence derived from the AOK in Lower Saxony varied between 49 and 66 NoV cases per 100,000 persons and was thus lower than at the federal level. Incidences of all inpatient and outpatient data were lower than the incidence according to the RKI in the last 2-3 years of the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: the disagreement between NoV incidences calculated from secondary inpatient and outpatient data and the respective numbers published by the RKI can be regarded as an indication that not all NoV cases were reported to public health authorities. This might be due to missed cases during the notification procedure or misclassification of gastroenteritis cases by general practitioners. Considering the limitations associated with analyzing secondary data, the appropriateness of these assumptions should be verified in future studies.

Surgical Smoke-Hazard Perceptions and Protective Measures in German Operating Rooms.

(1) Background: Hazardous substances in surgical smoke that is generated during laser or electrosurgery pose a potential health hazard. In Germany, the Technical Rules for Hazardous Substances (TRGS 525) have included recommendations for appropriate protective measures since 2014. Up to now, no empirical data has been available on the extent to which recommendations have been implemented in practice. (2) Methods: In 2018, 7089 surgeons in hospitals and outpatient practices were invited by email to participate in an online survey. In addition, 219 technical assistants were interviewed. The questionnaire dealt with knowledge of, and attitudes toward, the hazard potential of surgical smoke, as well as the availability and actual use of protective measures. Furthermore, manufacturers and distributors of smoke extraction devices were asked to give their assessment of the development of prevention in recent years. (3) Results: The survey response rate was 5% (surgeons) and 65% (technical assistant staff). Half of all surgeons assumed that there were high health hazards of surgical smoke without taking protective measures. Operating room nurses were more often concerned (88%). Only a few felt properly informed about the topic. The TRGS recommendations had been read by a minority of the respondents. In total, 52% of hospital respondents and 65% of the respondents in outpatient facilities reported any type of special suction system to capture surgical smoke. One-fifth of respondents from hospitals reported that technical measures had improved since the introduction of the TRGS 525. Fifty-one percent of the surgeons in hospitals and 70% of the surgeons in outpatient facilities "mostly" or "always" paid attention to avoiding surgical smoke. The most important reason for non-compliance with recommendations was a lack of problem awareness or thoughtlessness. Twelve industrial interviewees who assessed the situation and the development of prevention in practice largely confirmed the prevention gaps observed; only slight developments were observed in recent years. (4) Conclusions: The low response rate among surgeons and the survey results both indicate a major lack of interest and knowledge. Among other measures, team interventions with advanced training are needed in the future.