One-year follow-up of patients of the ongoing Dutch Q fever outbreak: clinical, serological and echocardiographic findings

Contains fulltext : 89915.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)PURPOSE: In 2007, a large goat-farming-associated Q fever outbreak occurred in the Netherlands. Data on the clinical outcome of Dutch Q fever patients are lacking. The current advocated follow-up strategy includes serological follow-up to detect evolution to chronic disease and cardiac screening at baseline to identify and prophylactically treat Q fever patients in case of valvulopathy. However, serological follow-up using commercially available tests is complicated by the lack of validated cut-off values. Furthermore, cardiac screening in the setting of a large outbreak has not been implemented previously. Therefore, we report here the clinical outcome, serological follow-up and cardiac screening data of the Q fever patients of the current ongoing outbreak. METHODS: The implementation of a protocol including clinical and serological follow-up at baseline and 3, 6 and 12 months after acute Q fever and screening echocardiography at baseline. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients with acute Q fever were identified (male 62%, female 38%). An aspecific, flu-like illness was the most common clinical presentation. Persistent symptoms after acute Q fever were reported by 59% of patients at 6 months and 30% at 12 months follow-up. We observed a typical serological response to Coxiella burnetii infection in both anti-phase I and anti-phase II IgG antibodies, with an increase in antibody titres up to 3 months and a subsequent decrease in the following 9 months. Screening echocardiography was available for 66 (78%) out of 85 Q fever patients. Cardiac valvulopathy was present in 39 (59%) patients. None of the 85 patients developed chronic Q fever. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical, serological and echocardiographic data of the current ongoing Dutch Q fever outbreak cohort are presented. Screening echocardiography is no longer part of the standard work-up of Q fever patients in the Netherlands.1 december 201

Q fever in the Netherlands: public perceptions and behavioral responses in three different epidemiological regions: a follow-up study

Contains fulltext : 136628.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Over the past years, Q fever has become a major public health problem in the Netherlands, with a peak of 2,357 human cases in 2009. In the first instance, Q fever was mainly a local problem of one province with a high density of large dairy goat farms, but in 2009 an alarming increase of Q fever cases was observed in adjacent provinces. The aim of this study was to identify trends over time and regional differences in public perceptions and behaviors, as well as predictors of preventive behavior regarding Q fever. METHODS: One cross-sectional survey (2009) and two follow-up surveys (2010, 2012) were performed. Adults, aged>/=18 years, that participated in a representative internet panel were invited (survey 1, n=1347; survey 2, n=1249; survey 3, n=1030). RESULTS: Overall, public perceptions and behaviors regarding Q fever were consistent with the trends over time in the numbers of new human Q fever cases in different epidemiological regions and the amount of media attention focused on Q fever in the Netherlands. However, there were remarkably low levels of perceived vulnerability and perceived anxiety, particularly in the region of highest incidence, where three-quarters of the total cases occurred in 2009. Predictors of preventive behavior were being female, older aged, having Q fever themselves or someone in their household, more knowledge, and higher levels of perceived severity, anxiety and (self-) efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: During future outbreaks of (zoonotic) infectious diseases, it will be important to instil a realistic sense of vulnerability by providing the public with accurate information on the risk of becoming infected. This should be given in addition to information about the severity of the disease, the efficacy of measures, and instructions for minimising infection risk with appropriate, feasible preventative measures. Furthermore, public information should be adapted to regional circumstances

burnetii infections during the 2009 outbreak in the

Relation between Q fever notifications and Coxiell

Q-koorts onderzoek in Nederland: resultaten tot nu toe

In 2008 en 2009 is er vooral in zuidelijk Nederland sprake geweest van een groot aantal Q-koortspatiënten (zie figuur). Vooral aan de bron (besmette melkgeitenbedrijven) zijn veel preventiemaatregelen genomen, waarna het aantal patiënten afnam. Het grote aantal ziektegevallen bood echter de gelegenheid om onderzoek te doen naar humane en veterinaire aspecten van de ziekte, verwekker, verspreiding en bestrijding. Het Nederlandse Q-koortsonderzoek kenmerkt zich door nauwe samenwerking tussen het humane en veterinaire veld. In dit artikel geven we een overzicht van de belangrijkste bevindingen uit inmiddels afgerond onderzoek

Large regional differences in serological follow-up of q Fever patients in the Netherlands

Contains fulltext : 118717.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: During the Dutch Q fever epidemic more than 4,000 Q fever cases were notified. This provided logistical challenges for the organisation of serological follow-up, which is considered mandatory for early detection of chronic infection. The aim of this study was to investigate the proportion of acute Q fever patients that received serological follow-up, and to identify regional differences in follow-up rates and contributing factors, such as knowledge of medical practitioners. METHODS: Serological datasets of Q fever patients diagnosed between 2007 and 2009 (N = 3,198) were obtained from three Laboratories of Medical Microbiology (LMM) in the province of Noord-Brabant. One LMM offered an active follow-up service by approaching patients; the other two only tested on physician's request. The medical microbiologist in charge of each LMM was interviewed. In December 2011, 240 general practices and 112 medical specialists received questionnaires on their knowledge and practices regarding the serological follow-up of Q fever patients. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent (2,226/2,346) of the Q fever patients diagnosed at the LMM with a follow-up service received at least one serological follow-up within 15 months of diagnosis. For those diagnosed at a LMM without this service, this was 25% (218/852) (OR 54, 95% CI 43-67). Although 80% (162/203) of all medical practitioners with Q fever patients reported informing patients of the importance of serological follow-up, 33% (67/203) never requested it. CONCLUSIONS: Regional differences in follow-up are substantial and range from 25% to 95%. In areas with a low follow-up rate the proportion of missed chronic Q fever is potentially higher than in areas with a high follow-up rate. Medical practitioners lack knowledge regarding the need, timing and implementation of serological follow-up, which contributes to patients receiving incorrect or no follow-up. Therefore, this information should be incorporated in national guidelines and patient information forms