C.J. Wijkmans

Investigation of a Q fever outbreak in a rural area of The Netherlands.

A Q fever outbreak occurred in the southeast of The Netherlands in spring and summer 2007. Risk factors for the acquisition of a recent Coxiella burnetii infection were studied. In total, 696 inhabitants in the cluster area were invited to complete a questionnaire and provide a blood sample for serological testing of IgG and IgM phases I and II antibodies against C. burnetii, in order to recruit seronegative controls for a case-control study. Questionnaires were also sent to 35 previously identified clinical cases. Limited environmental sampling focused on two goat farms in the area. Living in the east of the cluster area, in which a positive goat farm, cattle and small ruminants were situated, smoking and contact with agricultural products were associated with a recent infection. Information leaflets were distributed on a large scale to ruminant farms, including hygiene measures to reduce the risk of spread between animals and to humans.

Enhanced Hygiene Measures and Norovirus Transmission during an Outbreak

Enhanced hygiene measures can reduce norovirus transmission potential by 85%.

The health status of Q-fever patients after long-term follow-up.

BackgroundIn the Netherlands, from 2007 to 2009, 3,522 Q-fever cases were notified from three outbreaks. These are the largest documented outbreaks in the world. Previous studies suggest that symptoms can persist for a long period of time, resulting in a reduced quality of life (QoL). The aim of this study was to qualify and quantify the health status of Q-fever patients after long-term follow-up.Methods870 Q-fever patients of the 2007 and 2008 outbreaks were mailed a questionnaire 12 to 26 months after the onset of illness. We assessed demographic data and measured health status with the Nijmegen Clinical Screening Instrument (NCSI). The NCSI consists of three main domains of functional impairment, symptoms and QoL that are divided into eight sub-domains. The NCSI scores of Q-fever patients older than 50 years (N = 277) were compared with patients younger than 50 years (N = 238) and with norm data from healthy individuals (N = 65) and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (N = 128).ResultsThe response rate was 65.7%. After applying exclusion criteria 515 Q-fever patients were included in this study. The long-term health status of two thirds of Q-fever patients (both younger and older than 50 years) was severely affected for at least one sub-domain. Patients scores were most severely affected on the sub-domains general QoL (44.9%) and fatigue (43.5%). Hospitalisation in the acute phase was significantly related to long-term behavioural impairment (OR 2.8, CI 1.5-5.1), poor health related QoL (OR 2.3,CI 1.5-4.0) and subjective symptoms (OR 1.9, CI 1.1-3.6). Lung or heart disease, depression and arthritis significantly affected the long-term health status of Q-fever patients.ConclusionsQ-fever patients presented 12 to 26 months after the onset of illness severe -clinically relevant- subjective symptoms, functional impairment and impaired QoL. All measured sub-domains of the health status were impaired. Hospitalisation and co-morbidity were predictors for worse scores. Our data emphasise that more attention is needed not only to prevent exposure to Q-fever but also for the prevention and treatment of the long-term consequences of this zoönosis.

Assessing the long-term health impact of Q-fever in the Netherlands: a prospective cohort study started in 2007 on the largest documented Q-fever outbreak to date.

BackgroundBetween 2007 and 2011, the Netherlands experienced the largest documented Q-fever outbreak to date with a total of 4108 notified acute Q-fever patients. Previous studies have indicated that Q-fever patients may suffer from long-lasting health effects, such as fatigue and reduced quality of life. Our study aims to determine the long-term health impact of Q-fever. It will also compare the health status of Q-fever patients with three reference groups: 1) healthy controls, 2) patients with Legionnaires’ disease and 3) persons with a Q-fever infection but a-specific symptoms.Methods/designTwo groups of Q-fever patients were included in a prospective cohort study. In the first group the onset of illness was in 2007–2008 and participation was at 12 and 48 months. In the second group the onset of illness was in 2010–2011 and participation was at 6 time intervals, from 3 to 24 months. The reference groups were included at only one time interval. The subjective health status, fatigue status and quality of life of patients will be assessed using two validated quality of life questionnaires.DiscussionThis study is the largest prospective cohort study to date that focuses on the effects of acute Q-fever. It will determine the long-term (up to 4 years) health impact of Q-fever on patients and compare this to three different reference groups so that we can present a comprehensive assessment of disease progression over time.

Self-reported sick leave and long-term health symptoms of Q-fever patients

BACKGROUND In The Netherlands, 1168 Q-fever patients were notified in 2007 and 2008. Patients and general practitioners (GPs) regularly reported persisting symptoms after acute Q-fever, especially fatigue and long periods of sick leave, to the public health authorities. International studies on smaller Q-fever outbreaks demonstrate that symptoms may persist years after acute illness. Data for the Dutch outbreaks were unavailable. The aim of this study is to quantify sick leave after acute Q-fever and long-term symptoms. METHODS Our study targeted 898 acute Q-fever patients, notified in 2007 and 2008 residing in the Province Noord-Brabant. Patients from the 2008 cohort were mailed a questionnaire at 12 months and those of the 2007 cohort at 12-26 months after onset of illness. Patients reported underlying illness, Q-fever-related symptoms and sick leave. RESULTS The response rate was 64%. Forty percent of the working patients reported long-term (>1 month) sick leave. Pre-existent heart disease odds ratio (OR) 4.50; confidence interval (CI) 1.27-16.09), hospitalization in the acute phase (OR 3.99; 95% CI 2.15-7.43) and smoking (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.01-2.84) were significant predictors for long-term absence. Of the patients who resumed work, 9% were-at the time of completing the questionnaire-still unable to function at pre-infection levels due to fatigue or concentration problems. Of the respondents, 40% reported persisting physical symptoms at the time of follow-up. Fatigue (20%) was most frequently reported. Daily activities were affected in 30% of cases. CONCLUSIONS Q-fever poses a serious persisting long-term burden on patients and society.

Large Regional Differences in Serological Follow-Up of Q Fever Patients in The Netherlands

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 physicians 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.