Prevalence and subtypes of Influenza A Viruses in Wild Waterfowl in Norway 2006-2007

The prevalence of influenza A virus infection, and the distribution of different subtypes of the virus, were studied in 1529 ducks and 1213 gulls shot during ordinary hunting from August to December in two consecutive years, 2006 and 2007, in Norway. The study was based on molecular screening of cloacal and tracheal swabs, using a pan-influenza A RT-PCR. Samples found to be positive for influenza A virus were screened for the H5 subtype, using a H5 specific RT-PCR, and, if negative, further subtyped by a RT-PCR for the 3'-part of the hemagglutinin (HA) gene, encompassing almost the entire HA2, and the full-length of the neuraminidase (NA) gene, followed by sequencing and characterization. The highest prevalence (12.8%) of infection was found in dabbling ducks (Eurasian Wigeon, Common Teal and Mallard). Diving ducks (Common Goldeneye, Common Merganser, Red-breasted Merganser, Common Scoter, Common Eider and Tufted Duck) showed a lower prevalence (4.1%). In gulls (Common Gull, Herring Gull, Black-headed Gull, Lesser Black-headed Gull, Great Black-backed Gull and Kittiwake) the prevalence of influenza A virus was 6.1%. The infection prevalence peaked during October for ducks, and October/November for gulls. From the 16 hemagglutinin subtypes known to infect wild birds, 13 were detected in this study. Low pathogenic H5 was found in 17 dabbling ducks and one gull

Clinical utility of a nested nucleic acid amplification format in comparison to viral culture for the diagnosis of mucosal herpes simplex infection in a genitourinary medicine setting

BACKGROUND: Nested nucleic acid amplification tests are often thought too sensitive or prone to generatingfalse positive results for routine use. The current study investigated the specificity and clinicalutility of a routine multiplex nested assay for mucosal herpetic infections. METHODS: Ninety patients, categorised into those clinically diagnosed to (a) have and (b) not haveherpetic infection, were enrolled. Swabs from oral and ano-genital sites were assayed by thenested assay and culture and the results assessed against clinical evaluation for diagnosingherpetic infections; cell content was also recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-six and 64 patients were thought to (a) have and (b) not have mucosal herpeticinfection. Taking the clinical evaluation as indicating the presence of herpetic infection, thenested polymerase chain reaction and culture had respective sensitivities of 19/26 (73%) and12/26 (46%) (Χ(2) p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in specificities between nPCR62/64 (97%) and culture 63/64 (98%) (Χ(2) p = 1.0). Cell content was important for viraldetection by nPCR (Χ(2) p = 0.07) but not culture. Nesting was found necessary for sensitivity anddid not reduce specificity. Assay under-performance appeared related to sub-optimal cellcontent (20%) but may have reflected clinical over-diagnosis. The results suggest the need forvalidating specimen cell quality. CONCLUSIONS: This study questions the value of routine laboratory confirmation of mucosal herpetic infection. The adoption of a more discriminatory usage of laboratory diagnostic facilities for genital herpetic infection, taking account of cell content, and restricting it to those cases where it actually affects patient management, may be warranted

“It’s hard to tell”. The challenges of scoring patients on standardised outcome measures by multidisciplinary teams: a case study of Neurorehabilitation

Background Interest is increasing in the application of standardised outcome measures in clinical practice. Measures designed for use in research may not be sufficiently precise to be used in monitoring individual patients. However, little is known about how clinicians and in particular, multidisciplinary teams, score patients using these measures. This paper explores the challenges faced by multidisciplinary teams in allocating scores on standardised outcome measures in clinical practice. Methods Qualitative case study of an inpatient neurorehabilitation team who routinely collected standardised outcome measures on their patients. Data were collected using non participant observation, fieldnotes and tape recordings of 16 multidisciplinary team meetings during which the measures were recited and scored. Eleven clinicians from a range of different professions were also interviewed. Data were analysed used grounded theory techniques. Results We identified a number of instances where scoring the patient was 'problematic'. In 'problematic' scoring, the scores were uncertain and subject to revision and adjustment. They sometimes required negotiation to agree on a shared understanding of concepts to be measured and the guidelines for scoring. Several factors gave rise to this problematic scoring. Team members' knowledge about patients' problems changed over time so that initial scores had to be revised or dismissed, creating an impression of deterioration when none had occurred. Patients had complex problems which could not easily be distinguished from each other and patients themselves varied in their ability to perform tasks over time and across different settings. Team members from different professions worked with patients in different ways and had different perspectives on patients' problems. This was particularly an issue in the scoring of concepts such as anxiety, depression, orientation, social integration and cognitive problems. Conclusion From a psychometric perspective these problems would raise questions about the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the scores. However, from a clinical perspective, such characteristics are an inherent part of clinical judgement and reasoning. It is important to highlight the challenges faced by multidisciplinary teams in scoring patients on standardised outcome measures but it would be unwarranted to conclude that such challenges imply that these measures should not be used in clinical practice for decision making about individual patients. However, our findings do raise some concerns about the use of such measures for performance management

Avian influenza virus risk assessment in falconry

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a continuing threat of human infections with avian influenza viruses (AIV). In this regard falconers might be a potential risk group because they have close contact to their hunting birds (raptors such as falcons and hawks) as well as their avian prey such as gulls and ducks. Both (hunting birds and prey birds) seem to be highly susceptible to some AIV strains, especially H5N1. We therefore conducted a field study to investigate AIV infections in falconers, their falconry birds as well as prey birds.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>During 2 hunting seasons (2006/2007 and 2007/2008) falconers took tracheal and cloacal swabs from 1080 prey birds that were captured by their falconry birds (n = 54) in Germany. AIV-RNA of subtypes H6, H9, or H13 was detected in swabs of 4.1% of gulls (n = 74) and 3.8% of ducks (n = 53) using RT-PCR. The remaining 953 sampled prey birds and all falconry birds were negative. Blood samples of the falconry birds tested negative for AIV specific antibodies. Serum samples from all 43 falconers reacted positive in influenza A virus-specific ELISA, but remained negative using microneutralisation test against subtypes H5 and H7 and haemagglutination inhibition test against subtypes H6, H9 and H13.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although we were able to detect AIV-RNA in samples from prey birds, the corresponding falconry birds and falconers did not become infected. Currently falconers do not seem to carry a high risk for getting infected with AIV through handling their falconry birds and their prey.</p

Drowning is an apparent and unexpected recurrent cause of mass mortality of Common starlings (Sturnus vulgaris

Drowning is infrequently reported as a cause of death of wild birds and such incidents typically involve individual, rather than multiple, birds. Over a 21-year period (1993 to 2013 inclusive), we investigated 12 incidents of mortality of multiple (2 − 80+) Common starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) in Great Britain that appeared to be due to drowning. More than ten birds were affected in ten of these reported incidents. These incidents always occurred during the spring and early summer months and usually involved juvenile birds. In all cases, circumstantial evidence and post-mortem examinations indicated drowning to be the most likely cause of death with no underlying disease found. A behavioural explanation seems likely, possibly related to the gregarious nature of this species combined with juvenile inexperience in identifying water hazards. A review of data from the ringed bird recovery scheme across Great Britain (1909–2013 inclusive) of both starlings and Common blackbirds (Turdus merula), also a common garden visitor, identified additional suspected drowning incidents, which were significantly more common in the former species, supporting a species predisposition to drowning. For each species there was a marked seasonal peak from April to August. Drowning should be included as a differential diagnosis when investigating incidents of multiple starling mortality, especially of juveniles

Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO), like many other organisations around the world, has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the 10(th )of a series of 16 reviews that have been prepared as background for advice from the WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research to WHO on how to achieve this. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the literature on integrating values and consumers in guideline development. METHODS: We searched PubMed and three databases of methodological studies for existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. We reviewed the titles of all citations and retrieved abstracts and full text articles if the citations appeared relevant to the topic. We checked the reference lists of articles relevant to the questions and used snowballing as a technique to obtain additional information. We did not conduct a full systematic review ourselves. Our conclusions based on the available evidence, consideration of what WHO and other organisations are doing and logical arguments. KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: We did not find a systematic review of methods for integrating values in guidelines, but we found several systematic reviews that dealt with related topics. Whose values should WHO use when making recommendations? • Values, the relative importance or worth of a state or consequences of a decision (outcomes relating to benefits, harms, burden and costs), play a role in every recommendation. Ethical considerations, concepts that determine what is right, also play a role. • The values used in making recommendations should reflect those of the people affected. Judgements should be explicit and should be informed by input from those affected (including citizens, patients, clinicians and policy makers). • When differences in values may lead to different decisions or there is uncertainty about values, this should also be explicit. If differences in values are likely to affect a decision, such that people in different setting would likely make different choices about interventions or actions based on differences in their values, global recommendations should be explicit in terms of which values were applied and allow for adaptation after incorporating local values. How should WHO ensure that appropriate values are integrated in recommendations? • All WHO guideline groups should uniformly apply explicit, transparent and clearly described methods for integrating values. • WHO should consider involving relevant stakeholders if this is feasible and efficient. • WHO should develop a checklist for guidelines panels to help them to ensure that ethical considerations relevant to recommendations are addressed explicitly and transparently. How should users and consumers be involved in generating recommendations? • Including consumers in groups that are making global recommendations presents major challenges with respect to the impossibility of including a representative spectrum of consumers from a variety of cultures and settings. Nonetheless, consideration should be given to including consumers in groups who are able to challenge assumptions that are made about the values used for making recommendations, rather than represent the values of consumers around the world. • WHO should establish a network to facilitate involvement of users. • Draft recommendations should be reviewed by consumers, who should be asked explicitly to consider the values that were used. How should values be presented in recommendations? • Recommendations should include a description of how decisions were made about the relative importance of the consequences (benefits, harms and costs) of a decision. • Values that influence recommendations should be reported along with the research evidence underlying recommendations. • When differences in values would lead to different decisions or there is important uncertainty about values that are critical to a decision, this should be flagged and reflected in the strength of the recommendation. • Adaptable guideline templates that allow for integration of different values should be developed and used when differences in values are likely to be critical to a decision

Virological and serological surveillance for type A influenza in the black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The epidemiology of avian influenza viruses (AIVs) in gulls is only partially known. The role of the world's most numerous gull species, the black-legged kittiwake (<it>Rissa tridactyla</it>), as a potential AIV reservoir species has been unclear. The prevalence of AIV and humoral response against AIV were therefore studied in a colony of apparently healthy black-legged kittiwakes breeding in a nesting cliff in the South West Barents Region of Norway (70°22' N, 31°10' E), in 2008 and 2009.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>AIVs were detected from the oropharynx and cloaca in low amounts, with prevalences of 15% and 5%, in 2008 and 2009, respectively. Direct, partial sequencing of the hemagglutinin (HA) gene revealed that the H4 subtype was present. In 2009, antibodies to influenza A virus were detected in sera from 57 of 80 adult birds. In contrast, none of the three-week-old chicks (n = 18) tested seropositive. Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assays demonstrated that the adult kittiwakes primarily had antibodies specific to the gull-associated H13 and H16 subtypes, with antibodies to H16 being most common.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results support that the highly pelagic black-legged kittiwake is a reservoir of AIV. The serological findings suggest that H16 might be the main AIV subtype in the black-legged kittiwake. Further studies are needed to understand the ecology of AIV in the black-legged kittiwake and in gulls in general.</p

Genital herpes evaluation by quantitative TaqMan PCR: correlating single detection and quantity of HSV-2 DNA in cervicovaginal lavage fluids with cross-sectional and longitudinal clinical data

Abstract Objective To evaluate the utility of a single quantitative PCR (qPCR) measurement of HSV (HSV-1&amp;2) DNA in cervicovaginal lavage (CVL) specimens collected from women with predominantly chronic HSV-2 infection in assessing genital HSV shedding and the clinical course of genital herpes (GH) within a cohort with semiannual schedule of follow up and collection of specimens. Methods Two previously described methods used for detection of HSV DNA in mucocutaneous swab samples were adapted for quantification of HSV DNA in CVLs. Single CVL specimens from 509 women were tested. Presence and quantity of CVL HSV DNA were explored in relation to observed cross-sectional and longitudinal clinical data. Results The PCR assay was sensitive and reproducible with a limit of quantification of ~50 copies per milliliter of CVL. Overall, 7% of the samples were positive for HSV-2 DNA with median log10 HSV-2 DNA copy number of 3.9 (IQR: 2.6-5.7). No HSV-1 was detected. Presence and quantity of HSV-2 DNA in CVL directly correlated with the clinical signs and symptoms of presence of active symptomatic disease with frequent recurrences. Conclusion Single qPCR measurement of HSV DNA in CVL fluids of women with chronic HSV-2 infection provided useful information for assessing GH in the setting of infrequent sampling of specimens. Observed positive correlation of the presence and quantity of HSV-2 DNA with the presence of active and more severe course of HSV-2 infection may have clinical significance in the evaluation and management of HSV-2 infected patients

Evidence of Infection by H5N2 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Viruses in Healthy Wild Waterfowl

The potential existence of a wild bird reservoir for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) has been recently questioned by the spread and the persisting circulation of H5N1 HPAI viruses, responsible for concurrent outbreaks in migratory and domestic birds over Asia, Europe, and Africa. During a large-scale surveillance programme over Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, we detected avian influenza viruses of H5N2 subtype with a highly pathogenic (HP) viral genotype in healthy birds of two wild waterfowl species sampled in Nigeria. We monitored the survival and regional movements of one of the infected birds through satellite telemetry, providing a rare evidence of a non-lethal natural infection by an HP viral genotype in wild birds. Phylogenetic analysis of the H5N2 viruses revealed close genetic relationships with H5 viruses of low pathogenicity circulating in Eurasian wild and domestic ducks. In addition, genetic analysis did not reveal known gallinaceous poultry adaptive mutations, suggesting that the emergence of HP strains could have taken place in either wild or domestic ducks or in non-gallinaceous species. The presence of coexisting but genetically distinguishable avian influenza viruses with an HP viral genotype in two cohabiting species of wild waterfowl, with evidence of non-lethal infection at least in one species and without evidence of prior extensive circulation of the virus in domestic poultry, suggest that some strains with a potential high pathogenicity for poultry could be maintained in a community of wild waterfowl

Critical Review of Norovirus Surrogates in Food Safety Research: Rationale for Considering Volunteer Studies

The inability to propagate human norovirus (NoV) or to clearly differentiate infectious from noninfectious virus particles has led to the use of surrogate viruses, like feline calicivirus (FCV) and murine norovirus-1 (MNV), which are propagatable in cell culture. The use of surrogates is predicated on the assumption that they generally mimic the viruses they represent; however, studies are proving this concept invalid. In direct comparisons between FCV and MNV, their susceptibility to temperatures, environmental and food processing conditions, and disinfectants are dramatically different. Differences have also been noted between the inactivation of NoV and its surrogates, thus questioning the validity of surrogates. Considerable research funding is provided globally each year to conduct surrogate studies on NoVs; however, there is little demonstrated benefit derived from these studies in regard to the development of virus inactivation techniques or food processing strategies. Human challenge studies are needed to determine which processing techniques are effective in reducing NoVs in foods. A major obstacle to clinical trials on NoVs is the perception that such trials are too costly and risky, but in reality, there is far more cost and risk in allowing millions of unsuspecting consumers to contract NoV illness each year, when practical interventions are only a few volunteer studies away. A number of clinical trials have been conducted, providing important insights into NoV inactivation. A shift in research priorities from surrogate research to volunteer studies is essential if we are to identify realistic, practical, and scientifically valid processing approaches to improve food safety