Search

Psittacosis is typically a mild febrile respiratory illness caused by infection with the bacterium Chlamydia psittaci and usually transmitted to humans by infected birds (1). On average, 11 psittacosis cases per year were reported in the United States during 2000-2017. During August-October 2018, the largest U.S. psittacosis outbreak in 30 years (82 cases identified*) occurred in two poultry slaughter plants, one each in Virginia and Georgia, that shared source farms (2). CDC used C. psittaci real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to test 54 human specimens from this outbreak. This was the largest number of human specimens from a single outbreak ever tested for C. psittaci using real-time PCR, which is faster and more sensitive than commercially available serologic tests. This represented a rare opportunity to assess the utility of multiple specimen types for real-time PCR detection of C. psittaci. C. psittaci was detected more frequently in lower respiratory specimens (59% [10 of 17]) and stool (four of five) than in upper respiratory specimens (7% [two of 28]). Among six patients with sputum and nasopharyngeal swabs tested, C. psittaci was detected only in sputum in five patients. Cycle threshold (Ct) values suggested bacterial load was higher in lower respiratory specimens than in nasopharyngeal swabs. These findings support prioritizing lower respiratory specimens for real-time PCR detection of C. psittaci. Stool specimens might also have utility for diagnosis of psittacosis.

We compared severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 seroprevalence estimated from commercial laboratory residual sera and a community household survey in metropolitan Atlanta during April and May 2020 and found these 2 estimates to be similar (4.94% vs 3.18%). Compared with more representative surveys, commercial sera can provide an approximate measure of seroprevalence.

Background Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) can cause severe illness and death. Predictors of poor outcome collected on hospital admission may inform clinical and public health decisions. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational cohort investigation of 297 adults admitted to 8 academic and community hospitals in Georgia, United States, during March 2020. Using standardized medical record abstraction, we collected data on predictors including admission demographics, underlying medical conditions, outpatient antihypertensive medications, recorded symptoms, vital signs, radiographic findings, and laboratory values. We used random forest models to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for predictors of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and death. Results Compared with age Conclusions After adjustment for patient and clinical characteristics, older age was the strongest predictor of death, exceeding comorbidities, abnormal vital signs, and laboratory test abnormalities. That coronary artery disease, but not chronic lung disease, was associated with death among hospitalized patients warrants further investigation, as do associations between certain antihypertensive medications and death.

SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was first detected in the United States during January 2020 (1). Since then, >980,000 cases have been reported in the United States, including >55,000 associated deaths as of April 28, 2020 (2). Detailed data on demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, and clinical outcomes for persons hospitalized with COVID-19 are needed to inform prevention strategies and community-specific intervention messages. For this report, CDC, the Georgia Department of Public Health, and eight Georgia hospitals (seven in metropolitan Atlanta and one in southern Georgia) summarized medical record-abstracted data for hospitalized adult patients with laboratory-confirmed* COVID-19 who were admitted during March 2020. Among 305 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 61.6% were aged

We used the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card to screen 1,540 asymptomatic college students for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a low-prevalence setting. Compared with reverse transcription PCR, BinaxNOW showed 20% overall sensitivity; among participants with culturable virus, sensitivity was 60%. BinaxNOW provides point-of-care screening but misses many infections.

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Children In an outbreak of Covid-19 at a summer camp, 224 confirmed cases in children and adolescents 7 to 19 years of age were identified. After the campe...

There is increasing evidence that children and adolescents can efficiently transmit SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1-3). During July-August 2020, four state health departments and CDC investigated a COVID-19 outbreak that occurred during a 3-week family gathering of five households in which an adolescent aged 13 years was the index and suspected primary patient; 11 subsequent cases occurred.

Limited data are available about transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), among youths. During June 17-20, an overnight camp in Georgia (camp A) held orientation for 138 trainees and 120 staff members; staff members remained for the first camp session, scheduled during June 21-27, and were joined by 363 campers and three senior staff members on June 21. Camp A adhered to the measures in Georgia's Executive Order* that allowed overnight camps to operate beginning on May 31, including requiring all trainees, staff members, and campers to provide documentation of a negative viral SARS-CoV-2 test ≤12 days before arriving. Camp A adopted most† components of CDC's Suggestions for Youth and Summer Camps§ to minimize the risk for SARS-CoV-2 introduction and transmission. Measures not implemented were cloth masks for campers and opening windows and doors for increased ventilation in buildings. Cloth masks were required for staff members. Camp attendees were cohorted by cabin and engaged in a variety of indoor and outdoor activities, including daily vigorous singing and cheering. On June 23, a teenage staff member left camp A after developing chills the previous evening. The staff member was tested and reported a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 the following day (June 24). Camp A officials began sending campers home on June 24 and closed the camp on June 27. On June 25, the Georgia Department of Public Health (DPH) was notified and initiated an investigation. DPH recommended that all attendees be tested and self-quarantine, and isolate if they had a positive test result.

OBJECTIVES: In late June 2020, a large outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurred at a sleep-away youth camp in Georgia, affecting primarily persons ≤21 years. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among campers and staff (attendees) to determine the extent of the outbreak and assess factors contributing to transmission. METHODS: Attendees were interviewed to ascertain demographic characteristics, known exposures to COVID-19 and community exposures, and mitigation measures before, during, and after attending camp. COVID-19 case status was determined for all camp attendees on the basis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test results and reported symptoms. We calculated attack rates and instantaneous reproduction numbers and sequenced SARS-CoV-2 viral genomes from the outbreak. RESULTS: Among 627 attendees, the median age was 15 years (interquartile range: 12–16 years); 56% (351 of 627) of attendees were female. The attack rate was 56% (351 of 627) among all attendees. On the basis of date of illness onset or first positive test result on a specimen collected, 12 case patients were infected before arriving at camp and 339 case patients were camp associated. Among 288 case patients with available symptom information, 45 (16%) were asymptomatic. Despite cohorting, 50% of attendees reported direct contact with people outside their cabin cohort. On the first day of camp session, the instantaneous reproduction number was 10. Viral genomic diversity was low. CONCLUSIONS: Few introductions of SARS-CoV-2 into a youth congregate setting resulted in a large outbreak. Testing strategies should be combined with prearrival quarantine, routine symptom monitoring with appropriate isolation and quarantine, cohorting, social distancing, mask wearing, and enhanced disinfection and hand hygiene. Promotion of mitigation measures among younger populations is needed.

Background The epidemiological features and outcomes of hospitalized adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been described; however, the temporal progression and medical complications of disease among hospitalized patients require further study. Detailed descriptions of the natural history of COVID-19 among hospitalized patients are paramount to optimize health care resource utilization, and the detection of different clinical phenotypes may allow tailored clinical management strategies. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 305 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 8 academic and community hospitals. Patient characteristics included demographics, comorbidities, medication use, medical complications, intensive care utilization, and longitudinal vital sign and laboratory test values. We examined laboratory and vital sign trends by mortality status and length of stay. To identify clinical phenotypes, we calculated Gower’s dissimilarity matrix between each patient’s clinical characteristics and clustered similar patients using the partitioning around medoids algorithm. Results One phenotype of 6 identified was characterized by high mortality (49%), older age, male sex, elevated inflammatory markers, high prevalence of cardiovascular disease, and shock. Patients with this severe phenotype had significantly elevated peak C-reactive protein creatinine, D-dimer, and white blood cell count and lower minimum lymphocyte count compared with other phenotypes (P Conclusions Among a cohort of hospitalized adults, we identified a severe phenotype of COVID-19 based on the characteristics of its clinical course and poor prognosis. These findings need to be validated in other cohorts, as improved understanding of clinical phenotypes and risk factors for their development could help inform prognosis and tailored clinical management for COVID-19.

A better understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from children and adolescents is crucial for informing public health mitigation strategies. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among household contacts of primary cases defined as children and adolescents aged 7⍰19 years with laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection acquired during an overnight camp outbreak. Among household contacts, we defined secondary cases using the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists definition. Among 526 household contacts of 224 primary cases, 48 secondary cases were identified, corresponding to a secondary attack rate of 9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7%–12%). Our findings show that children and adolescents can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to adult contacts and other children in a household setting.

During August–October, 2018, an outbreak of severe respiratory illness was reported among poultry slaughter plant workers in Virginia and Georgia, USA. A multiorganizational team investigated the cause and extent of illness, determined that the illness was psittacosis, and evaluated and recommended controls for health hazards in the workplace to prevent additional cases.

Background: Peritoneal dialysis is a type of dialysis performed by patients in their homes; patients receive training from dialysis clinic staff. Peritonitis is a serious complication of peritoneal dialysis, most commonly caused by gram-positive organisms. During March‒April 2019, a dialysis provider organization transitioned ~400 patients to a different manufacturer of peritoneal dialysis equipment and supplies (from product A to B). Shortly thereafter, patients experienced an increase in peritonitis episodes, caused predominantly by gram-negative organisms. In May 2019, we initiated an investigation to determine the source. Methods: We conducted case finding, reviewed medical records, observed peritoneal dialysis procedures and trainings, and performed patient home visits and interviews. A 1:1 matched case–control study was performed in 1 state. A case had ≥2 of the following: (1) positive peritoneal fluid culture, (2) high peritoneal fluid white cell count with ≥50% polymorphonuclear cells, or (3) cloudy peritoneal fluid and/or abdominal pain. Controls were matched to cases by week of clinic visit. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate univariate matched odds ratios (mOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We conducted microbiological testing of peritoneal dialysis fluid bags to rule out product contamination. Results: During March‒September 2019, we identified 157 cases of peritonitis across 15 clinics in 2 states (attack rate≍39%). Staphylococcus spp (14%), Serratia spp (12%) and Klebsiella spp (6.3%) were the most common pathogens. Steps to perform peritoneal dialysis using product B differed from product A in several key areas; however, no common errors in practice were identified to explain the outbreak. Patient training on transitioning products was not standardized. Outcomes of the 73 cases in the case–control study included hospitalization (77%), peritoneal dialysis failure (40%), and death (7%). The median duration of training prior to product transition was 1 day for cases and controls (P = .86). Transitioning to product B (mOR, 18.00; 95% CI, 2.40‒134.83), using product B (mOR, 18.26; 95% CI, 3.86‒∞), drain-line reuse (mOR, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.34‒16.24) and performing daytime exchanges (mOR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.71‒8.45) were associated with peritonitis. After several interventions, including transition of patients back to product A (Fig. 1), overall cases declined. Sterility testing of samples from 23 unopened product B peritoneal dialysis solution bags showed no contamination. Conclusions: Multiple factors may have contributed to this large outbreak, including a rapid transition in peritoneal dialysis products and potentially inadequate patient training. Efforts are needed to identify and incorporate best training practices, and product advances are desired to improve the safety of patient transitions between different types of peritoneal dialysis equipment.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

During the First World War, anthrax cases in the United States and England increased greatly and seemed to be associated with use of new shaving brushes. Further investigation revealed that the source material and origin of shaving brushes had changed during the war. Cheap brushes of imported horsehair were being made to look like the preferred badger-hair brushes. Unfortunately, some of these brushes were not effectively disinfected and brought with them a nasty stowaway: Bacillus anthracis. A review of outbreak summaries, surveillance data, and case reports indicated that these cases originated from the use of ineffectively disinfected animal-hair shaving brushes. This historical information is relevant to current public health practice because renewed interest in vintage and animal-hair shaving brushes has been seen in popular culture. This information should help healthcare providers and public health officials answer questions on this topic.

Background Psittacosis is a respiratory illness caused by Chlamydia psittaci. The most commonly available diagnostic tests are serologic tests, which have low sensitivity and can cross-react with other chlamydial species. Serologic tests also require paired sera collected weeks apart, which is impractical for patient management. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (rtPCR) testing for C. psittaci is rapid, sensitive, and specific. However, rtRCR testing is only available at the CDC Respiratory Diseases Branch laboratory, and appropriate clinical specimen types need to be validated since psittacosis case detection is infrequent. In 2018, the first large psittacosis outbreak in the United States in 30 years occurred, allowing assessment of rtPCR performance among multiple clinical specimen types. Methods rtPCR test positivity rate and turnaround time were determined among 89 specimens tested at CDC from 54 outbreak patients with suspected psittacosis. rtPCR testing was performed on nucleic acid extracted from clinical specimens using oligonucleotides targeting the C. psittaci locus tag CPSIT_RS01985. Clinical information was collected by patient interview and medical record review. Results Positivity rates among the most common specimen types were 4.4% (2/46) for nasopharyngeal (NP) swab, 36.4% (8/22) for sputum, and 80.0% (4/5) for stool. Of 21 (24%) specimens with available data, the average time from patient symptom onset to specimen collection was 6 days (range 1–11 days). C. psittaci was detected in specimens from 13 of 54 outbreak patients tested (Table 1); all 13 patients had radiographically-confirmed pneumonia, and 7 were rtPCR-positive from a lower respiratory specimen only. Paired sputum and NP swab specimens were tested for 6 patients; C. psittaci was detected in all sputum but only 1 NP swab. The positive NP swab was from a patient requiring intensive care unit admission and intubation. All results were reported within 1 business day of specimen receipt in the lab. Conclusion These data suggest that lower respiratory specimens are more sensitive than NP swabs for rtPCR detection of C. psittaci; stool might be a suitable alternative. Widespread implementation of rtPCR testing using appropriate specimen types could improve psittacosis detection and inform timely public health interventions. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Surveillance for influenza A viruses in swine is critical to human and animal health because influenza A virus rapidly evolves in swine populations and new strains are continually emerging. Swine are able to be infected by diverse lineages of influenza A virus making them important hosts for the emergence and maintenance of novel influenza A virus strains. Sampling pigs in diverse settings such as commercial swine farms, agricultural fairs, and live animal markets is important to provide a comprehensive view of currently circulating IAV strains. The current gold-standard ante-mortem sampling technique (i.e. collection of nasal swabs) is labor intensive because it requires physical restraint of the pigs. Nasal wipes involve rubbing a piece of fabric across the snout of the pig with minimal to no restraint of the animal. The nasal wipe procedure is simple to perform and does not require personnel with professional veterinary or animal handling training. While slightly less sensitive than nasal swabs, virus detection and isolation rates are adequate to make nasal wipes a viable alternative for sampling individual pigs when low stress sampling methods are required. The proceeding protocol outlines the steps needed to collect a viable nasal wipe from an individual pig.

Background Sporadic influenza A virus (IAV) outbreaks in humans and swine have resulted from commingling of large numbers of people and pigs at agricultural fairs in the United States. Current antemortem IAV surveillance strategies in swine require collecting nasal swabs, which entails restraining pigs with snares. Restraint is labor-intensive for samplers, stressful for pigs, and displeasing to onlookers because pigs often resist and vocalize. Objective To evaluate the utility of snout wipes in exhibition swine as a method to make IAV surveillance efforts less intrusive, less labor-intensive, and more widely accepted among pig owners and exhibition officials. Methods Three materials (rayon/polyester gauze, cotton gauze, and Swiffer® Sweeper dry cloths) were inoculated with IAV, and viral recoveries from these materials were quantified using qRT-PCR and TCID50 assays. In a field trial, paired cotton gauze snout wipes and gold standard polyester-tipped nasal swabs were collected from 553 pigs representing 29 agricultural fairs and the qualitative results of rRT-PCR and viral isolation were compared. Results and Conclusions Viral recoveries from potential snout wipe materials ranged from 0·26 to 1·59 log10 TCID50/ml less than that of the positive control in which no substrate was included; rayon/polyester gauze performed significantly worse than the other materials. In the field, snout wipes and nasal swabs had high levels of agreement for both rRT-PCR detection and virus isolation. Although further investigation and refinement of the sampling method is needed, results indicate that snout wipes will facilitate convenient and undisruptive IAV surveillance in pigs at agricultural fairs.