ABSTRACT
On December 11, 2015, the Fort Wayne-Allen County (Indiana) Department of Health was notified by a local hospital laboratory of a suspected case of meningococcal meningitis based on Gram stain results of cerebrospinal fluid. The county health department interviewed close family members and friends of the patient to establish an infectious period, timeline of events, and possible exposures. Close medical and household contacts were offered chemoprophylaxis (1). This case was associated with an elementary school. The patient had intermittent, close, potentially face-to-face contact with many students, and was reported to have had a persistent, productive cough throughout the exposure period. In light of these unusual circumstances, and the fact that elementary school-aged children are not routinely vaccinated against meningococcal disease,* local and state health officials, with CDC support, decided to offer chemoprophylaxis to the patient's contacts. A total of 581 child and adult contacts were identified.
Subject(s)
Ciprofloxacin/therapeutic use , Meningitis, Meningococcal/diagnosis , Meningitis, Meningococcal/prevention & control , Neisseria meningitidis, Serogroup B/isolation & purification , Rifampin/therapeutic use , Adult , Child , Contact Tracing , Female , Humans , Indiana , Male , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Pregnancy , SchoolsABSTRACT
Given the potential worsening clinical severity of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus (pH1N1) infection from spring to fall 2009, we conducted a clinical case series among patients hospitalized with pH1N1 infection from September through October 2009. A case patient was defined as a hospitalized person who had test results positive for pH1N1 virus by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Among 255 hospitalized patients, 34% were admitted to an intensive care unit and 8% died. Thirty-four percent of patients were children <18 years of age, 8% were adults ≥ 65 years of age, and 67% had an underlying medical condition. Chest radiographs obtained at hospital admission that had findings that were consistent with pneumonia were noted in 103 (46%) of 255 patients. Among 255 hospitalized patients, 208 (82%) received neuraminidase inhibitors, but only 47% had treatment started ≤ 2 days after illness onset. Overall, characteristics of hospitalized patients with pH1N1 infection in fall 2009 were similar to characteristics of patients hospitalized with pH1N1 infection in spring 2009, which suggests that clinical severity did not change substantially over this period.
Subject(s)
Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/isolation & purification , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/virology , Pandemics , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Child , Child, Preschool , Critical Care/standards , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Influenza, Human/mortality , Influenza, Human/pathology , Lung/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Radiography, Thoracic , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: During March 2004, a large outbreak of legionnaires disease and Pontiac fever occurred among hotel guests in Oklahoma. An investigation was conducted to identify the source and evaluate the utility of the Legionella urine antigen assay and serologic testing for the identification of Pontiac fever. METHODS: A retrospective cohort investigation of hotel guests and employees and an environmental evaluation were performed. Participants were interviewed, and clinical specimens were collected from consenting individuals. RESULTS: Six cases of legionnaires disease and 101 cases of Pontiac fever were identified. Exposure to the indoor pool and hot tub area was associated with legionellosis (relative risk, 4.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.8-6.9). Specimens from the pool and hot tub tested positive for Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 by polymerase chain reaction. For Pontiac fever, the sensitivity and positive predictive value were 35.7% and 100%, respectively, for the urine antigen assay, and 46.4% and 90%, respectively, for serologic testing. The specificity and negative predictive value were 100% and 47.8%, respectively, for the urine antigen assay, and 89.3% and 45.5%, respectively, for serologic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Urine antigen testing, with or without serologic testing, can be used to confirm outbreak-associated cases of Pontiac fever caused by L. pneumophila serogroup 1.
