14th ICID - Poster Abstracts - International Society for Infectious ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

When citing these abstracts please use the following reference: Author(s) of abstract. Title of abstract [abstract]. Int J Infect Dis 2010;14S1: Abstract number. Please note that the official publication of the International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2010, Volume 14, Supplement 1 is available electronically on http://www.sciencedirect.com Final Abstract Number: 31.005 Session: Non-tubercolous Mycobacteria Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 Time: 12:30-13:30 Room: Poster & Exhibition Area/Ground Level Type: Poster Presentation Characterization of nontuberculous mycobacteria isolated of potable water distribution system and wastewater of Mexico City Metropolitan Area L. Lloret-Sanchez, A. I. Castillo, M. Mazari-Hiriart, M. Vargas, Y. López-Vidal UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico Background: Background: Nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are normal inhabitants of the environment and they are found in soil, dust and water including natural and potable water and since there is no evidence of person-to-person transmission, the water is considered the main vehicle for transmission of nontuberculous mycobacteria. Some studies have shown that the rate of infection by nontuberculous mycobacteria is increasing in predisposing hosts as well as healthy persons. On the other hand NTM may alter replication of vaccine Mycobacterium bovis Bacillus Calmette and Guerin in animal model and influence in the protection subsequent BCG vaccination. The aim of this study was the isolation and identification of nontuberculous mycobacteria in: drinking water distribution systems in the Mexico City Metropolitan zone. Methods: Water samples were decontaminated by NaOH/SDS and cultured onto Lowenstein Jensen to 37ºC/ 30 days. Different colonies were identified by PCR-PRA 65 kDa gen, sequencing and phylogenetic inference. Results: We isolated NTM in both water sources. The most frequently occurring isolates in potable water supply system were M. nonchromogenicum, M. arupense, M. peregrinum and M. gordonae. Eleven species were isolated in wastewater and one Mycobacterium spp. Conclusion: It is important to know the geographic distribution of nontuberculous mycobacteria presence in drinking and wastewater because represent a risk for the population health.
When citing these abstracts please use the following reference: Author(s) of abstract. Title of abstract [abstract]. Int J Infect Dis 2010;14S1: Abstract number. Please note that the official publication of the International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2010, Volume 14, Supplement 1 is available electronically on http://www.sciencedirect.com Final Abstract Number: 32.001 Session: Travel Medicine and Travel Health Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 Time: 12:30-13:30 Room: Poster & Exhibition Area/Ground Level Type: Poster Presentation Mass screening for fever: A comparison of three infrared thermal dectection systems and selfreported fever A. Nguyen 1 , N. Cohen 2 , H. Lipman 1 , C. Brown 1 , D. Fishbein 3 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Chicago, IL, USA, 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 30333, GA, USA Background: During the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome and 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) outbreaks, infrared thermal detection systems (ITDS) were used at international ports of entry and in hospitals to screen for fever. However, evidence is limited to support the accuracy of ITDS and their benefit over self-reported fever for mass screening. In this study, we compared three different ITDS to self-reported fever. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 2986 patients (age 18 years) was conducted in three hospital emergency departments. Patients were asked if they felt that they had a fever (selfreported fever). We measured patient skin temperatures by using three ITDS (FLIR A20M, OptoTherm Thermoscreen, Wahl HSI2000S) and oral temperatures (100oF = confirmed fever) by using digital thermometers. ITDS temperature measurements and self-reported fevers were compared using oral temperatures as a reference. Data were analyzed using simple and multiple linear methods. Results: Of 2873 patients with an oral temperature recorded, 64 (2.2%) had a confirmed fever. Fever was reported by 476 (16.6%) patients and 48 (10.1%) of these were confirmed. Selfreported fever had 75.0% sensitivity and 84.7% specificity. At optimal cutoffs for detecting fever as found in this study, the OptoTherm Thermoscreen and FLIR A20M temperature measurements had greater sensitivity (85.7% and 79.0%) and specificity (91.0% and 92.0%) than self-reported fever. Of the three methods evaluated (ITDS, self report, and a combination in which a signal on either ITDS or self report indicated a fever), ITDS (OptoTherm Thermoscreen and FLIR A20M) had the highest total sensitivity and specificity for fever detection. Correlations between ITDS measurements and oral temperatures were similar for the OptoTherm Thermoscreen (r=0.43) and FLIR A20M (r=0.42), and significantly lower for Wahl HSI2000S (r=0.14, p0.001 for both comparisons). Conclusion: When compared with oral temperatures, two ITDS (FLIR A20M and OptoTherm Thermoscreen) were reasonably accurate in detecting fever and were better predictors of fever than self report. These findings may be particularly important in the context of travel in which fever may not be reported or cannot be measured using contact thermometers. In such settings, ITDS could provide an objective means for detecting fever as part of a comprehensive public health screening strategy.
Page 1 and 2:
When citing these abstracts please
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166: When citing these abstracts please
Page 215: When citing these abstracts please
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299:
show all

14th ICID - Poster Abstracts - International Society for Infectious ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?