ArticleBMC infectious diseases2009
Protective measures and H5N1-seroprevalence among personnel tasked with bird collection during an outbreak of avian influenza A/H5N1 in wild birds, Ruegen, Germany, 2006.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Serological evidence of human infections with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) virus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Brief literature review for the WHO global influenza research agenda--highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 risk in humans.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2013Pooled it
- Assessment of serosurveys for H5N1.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013Pooled it
- Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1): pathways of exposure at the animal-human interface, a systematic review.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- Occupational Risk from Avian Influenza Viruses at Different Ecological Interfaces Between 1997 and 2019.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Preventive, safety and control measures against Avian Influenza A(H5N1) in occupationally exposed groups: A scoping review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- [Occupational exposure to influenza virus of the wild birds].Revista espanola de salud publica · 2020Article
- Does exposure to poultry and wild fowl confer immunity to H5N1?Chinese medical journal · 2014Article
- APPENDIX 1: Evidence Review on Occupational Exposure of Swine and Poultry Workers: An Advisory Committee Statement (ACS) National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI).Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2013Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Germany, the first outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza A/H5N1 occurred among wild birds on the island of Ruegen between February and April 2006. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of recommended protective measures and to measure H5N1-seroprevalence among personnel tasked with bird collection.
methodsInclusion criteria of our study were participation in collecting wild birds on Ruegen between February and March 2006. Study participants were asked to complete a questionnaire, and to provide blood samples. For evaluation of the use of protective measures, we developed a personal protective equipment (PPE)-score ranging between 0 and 9, where 9 corresponds to a consistent and complete use of PPE. Sera were tested by plaque neutralization (PN) and microneutralization (MN) assays. Reactive sera were reanalyzed in the World Health Organization-Collaborating Centre (WHO-CC) using MN assay.
resultsOf the eligible personnel, consisting of firemen, government workers and veterinarians, 61% (97/154) participated in the study. Of those, 13% reported having always worn all PPE-devices during bird collection (PPE-score: 9). Adherence differed between firemen (mean PPE-score: 6.6) and government workers (mean PPE-score: 4.5; p = 0.006). The proportion of personnel always adherent to wearing PPE was lowest for masks (19%). Of the participants, 18% had received seasonal influenza vaccination prior to the outbreak. There were no reports of influenza-like illness. Five sera initially H5-reactive by PN assay were negative by WHO-CC confirmatory testing.
conclusionGaps and variability in adherence demonstrate the risk of exposure to avian influenza under conditions of wild bird collection, and justify serological testing and regular training of task personnel.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.