Search

Zika virus is a flavivirus that was first isolated in 1947 from a rhesus macaque in the Zika Forest in Uganda. Zika virus is primarily transmitted to humans by infected [...]

Psittacosis results from inhalation of aerosolized droppings or respiratory secretions of birds infected with Chlamydiapsittaci. During 2008-2017, a total of 60 cases of psittacosis, a nationally notifiable disease in the [...]

Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), a rodentborne arenavirus, causes inapparent infection in mice but can cause febrile illness, aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, and severe birth defects in humans (www.cdc.gov/ ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/lcmv.htm) (1). LCMV [...]

We describe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among US food manufacturing and agriculture workers and provide updated information on meat and poultry processing workers. Among 742 food and agriculture workplaces in 30 states, 8,978 workers had confirmed COVID-19; 55 workers died. Racial and ethnic minority workers could be disproportionately affected by COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meat and poultry processing facilities face distinctive challenges in the control of infectious diseases, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). COVID-19 outbreaks among meat and poultry processing facility workers can rapidly affect large numbers of persons. Assessment of COVID-19 cases among workers in 115 meat and poultry processing facilities through April 27, 2020, documented 4,913 cases and 20 deaths reported by 19 states (1). This report provides updated aggregate data from states regarding the number of meat and poultry processing facilities affected by COVID-19, the number and demographic characteristics of affected workers, and the number of COVID-19-associated deaths among workers, as well as descriptions of interventions and prevention efforts at these facilities. Aggregate data on confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths among workers identified and reported through May 31, 2020, were obtained from 239 affected facilities (those with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case in one or more workers) in 23 states.* COVID-19 was confirmed in 16,233 workers, including 86 COVID-19-related deaths. Among 14 states reporting the total number of workers in affected meat and poultry processing facilities (112,616), COVID-19 was diagnosed in 9.1% of workers. Among 9,919 (61%) cases in 21 states with reported race/ethnicity, 87% occurred among racial and ethnic minority workers. Commonly reported interventions and prevention efforts at facilities included implementing worker temperature or symptom screening and COVID-19 education, mandating face coverings, adding hand hygiene stations, and adding physical barriers between workers. Targeted workplace interventions and prevention efforts that are appropriately tailored to the groups most affected by COVID-19 are critical to reducing both COVID-19-associated occupational risk and health disparities among vulnerable populations. Implementation of these interventions and prevention efforts† across meat and poultry processing facilities nationally could help protect workers in this critical infrastructure industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In fall 2017, 3 solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients from a common donor developed encephalitis within 1 week of transplantation, prompting suspicion of transplant-transmitted infection. Eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV) infection was identified during testing of endomyocardial tissue from the heart recipient. Methods We reviewed medical records of the organ donor and transplant recipients and tested serum, whole blood, cerebrospinal fluid, and tissue from the donor and recipients for evidence of EEEV infection by multiple assays. We investigated blood transfusion as a possible source of organ donor infection by testing remaining components and serum specimens from blood donors. We reviewed data from the pretransplant organ donor evaluation and local EEEV surveillance. Results We found laboratory evidence of recent EEEV infection in all organ recipients and the common donor. Serum collected from the organ donor upon hospital admission tested negative, but subsequent samples obtained prior to organ recovery were positive for EEEV RNA. There was no evidence of EEEV infection among donors of the 8 blood products transfused into the organ donor or in products derived from these donations. Veterinary and mosquito surveillance showed recent EEEV activity in counties nearby the organ donor's county of residence. Neuroinvasive EEEV infection directly contributed to the death of 1 organ recipient and likely contributed to death in another. Conclusions Our investigation demonstrated EEEV transmission through SOT. Mosquito-borne transmission of EEEV to the organ donor was the likely source of infection. Clinicians should be aware of EEEV as a cause of transplant-associated encephalitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During 2012-2014, five cases of Rickettsia parkeri rickettsiosis were identified by a single urgent care practice in Georgia, located approximately 40 miles southwest of Atlanta. Symptom onset occurred during June-October, and all patients had a known tick bite. Patients ranged in age from 27 to 72 years (median = 53 years), and all were male. The most commonly reported initial signs were erythema (n = 3) and swelling (n = 2) at the site of the bite. Two patients reported fever and a third patient reported a rash and lymphadenopathy without fever. Other symptoms included myalgia (n = 3), chills (n = 3), fatigue (n = 2), arthralgia (n = 2), and headache (n = 2). Eschar biopsy specimens were collected from each patient using a 4-mm or 5-mm punch and placed in 10% neutral buffered formalin or sterile saline. These specimens were tested by immunohistochemical (IHC) stains, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assays, or cell culture isolation to determine if there was evidence of infection with a Rickettsia species (1). IHC evidence of spotted fever group rickettsiae was found in the eschar biopsy specimens in all five cases. In four cases, the biopsy specimens were also positive for R. parkeri by qPCR. The fifth case (specimen positive only by IHC testing) was considered a probable R. parkeri case based on clinical signs and symptoms. R. parkeri was grown in cell culture from one specimen from which isolation was attempted. All patients were treated with oral doxycycline (100 mg twice daily) for a minimum of 10 days, and all recovered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Congregate work and residential locations are at increased risk for infectious disease transmission including respiratory illness outbreaks. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is primarily spread person to person through respiratory droplets. Nationwide, the meat and poultry processing industry, an essential component of the U.S. food infrastructure, employs approximately 500,000 persons, many of whom work in proximity to other workers (1). Because of reports of initial cases of COVID-19, in some meat processing facilities, states were asked to provide aggregated data concerning the number of meat and poultry processing facilities affected by COVID-19 and the number of workers with COVID-19 in these facilities, including COVID-19-related deaths. Qualitative data gathered by CDC during on-site and remote assessments were analyzed and summarized. During April 9-27, aggregate data on COVID-19 cases among 115 meat or poultry processing facilities in 19 states were reported to CDC. Among these facilities, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 4,913 (approximately 3%) workers, and 20 COVID-19-related deaths were reported. Facility barriers to effective prevention and control of COVID-19 included difficulty distancing workers at least 6 feet (2 meters) from one another (2) and in implementing COVID-19-specific disinfection guidelines.* Among workers, socioeconomic challenges might contribute to working while feeling ill, particularly if there are management practices such as bonuses that incentivize attendance. Methods to decrease transmission within the facility include worker symptom screening programs, policies to discourage working while experiencing symptoms compatible with COVID-19, and social distancing by workers. Source control measures (e.g., the use of cloth face covers) as well as increased disinfection of high-touch surfaces are also important means of preventing SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Mitigation efforts to reduce transmission in the community should also be considered. Many of these measures might also reduce asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission (3). Implementation of these public health strategies will help protect workers from COVID-19 in this industry and assist in preserving the critical meat and poultry production infrastructure (4)., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The Ebola virus disease (Ebola) epidemic in West Africa has so far produced approximately 25,000 cases, more than 40 times the number in any previously documented Ebola outbreak. Because of the risk for imported disease from infected travelers, in October 2014 CDC recommended that all travelers to the United States from Ebola-affected countries receive enhanced entry screening and postarrival active monitoring for Ebola signs or symptoms until 21 days after their departure from an Ebola-affected country. The state of Georgia began its active monitoring program on October 25, 2014. The Georgia Department of Public Health (DPH) modified its existing, web-based electronic notifiable disease reporting system to create an Ebola Active Monitoring System (EAMS). DPH staff members developed EAMS from conceptualization to implementation in 6 days. In accordance with CDC recommendations, "low (but not zero) risk" travelers are required to report their daily health status to DPH, and the EAMS dashboard enables DPH epidemiologists to track symptoms and compliance with active monitoring. Through March 31, 2015, DPH monitored 1,070 travelers, and 699 (65%) used their EAMS traveler login instead of telephone or e-mail to report their health status. Medical evaluations were performed on 30 travelers, of whom three were tested for Ebola. EAMS has enabled two epidemiologists to monitor approximately 100 travelers daily, and to rapidly respond to travelers reporting signs and symptoms of potential Ebola virus infection. Similar electronic tracking systems might be useful for other jurisdictions.

Background: In the United States in the 1990s, the incidence of reported pertussis in adults, adolescents and infants increased; infants younger than 1 year of age had the highest reported incidence., Methods: In 4 states with Enhanced Pertussis Surveillance, we examined the epidemiology of reported pertussis cases to determine the source of pertussis among infants. A source was defined as a person with an acute cough illness who had contact with the case-infant 7-20 days before the infant's onset of cough., Results: The average annual pertussis incidence per 100,000 infants younger than 1 year of age varied by state: 22.9 in Georgia; 42.1 in Illinois; 93.0 in Minnesota; and 35.8 in Massachusetts. Family members of 616 (80%) of 774 reported case-infants were interviewed; a source was identified for 264 (43%) of the 616 case-infants. Among the 264 case-infants, mothers were the source for 84 (32%) and another family member was the source for 113 (43%). Of the 219 source-persons with known age, 38 (17%) were age 0-4 years, 16 (7%) were age 5-9 years, 43 (20%) were age 10-19 years, 45 (21%) were age 20-29 years and 77 (35%) were age > or =30 years., Conclusions: The variation in reported pertussis incidence in the 4 states might have resulted from differences in awareness of pertussis among health care providers, diagnostic capacity and case classification. Among case-infants with an identifiable source, family members (at any age) were the main source of pertussis. Understanding the source of pertussis transmission to infants may provide new approaches to prevent pertussis in the most vulnerable infants.