BACKGROUND: Limitations associated with the under-reporting of enteric illnesses have long been recognized but the extent and variation of this under-reporting in Canada has not been examined. Given the public health value of surveillance data, a closer examination of under-reporting of enteric illnesses in Canada was warranted. METHODS: Paper-based surveys were administered (a) to all laboratories in Canada licensed to process stool specimens and (b) to all local public health authorities in two provinces. RESULTS: Of the laboratories surveyed, 67% (n=274) conducted on-site testing of stool specimens for enteric bacteria, 31% (n=126) for parasites and 10% (n=42) for viruses. In the year 2000, these laboratories processed 459,982 stool specimens, of which 5%, 15%, 8% and 19% were positive for enteric bacteria (excluding C. difficile), C. difficile, parasites and viruses, respectively. Variations in laboratory testing and health authority reporting protocols and policies were identified. Of the laboratory-confirmed cases of AGI reported to local public health authorities, 5% (n=846) were not reported to provincial counterparts. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of AGI cases submitting stool specimens are not captured in Canada's passive surveillance system due to unknown etiology. A much smaller proportion of laboratory-confirmed cases reported to local public health authorities are not captured at the provincial or national level. Given that the number of laboratory-confirmed AGI cases represents such a small fraction of all community cases, strategies to compensate for under-reporting and efforts directed at harmonizing laboratory and local public health authority policies and practices would be welcomed.
BACKGROUND: Limitations associated with the under-reporting of enteric illnesses have long been recognized but the extent and variation of this under-reporting in Canada has not been examined. Given the public health value of surveillance data, a closer examination of under-reporting of enteric illnesses in Canada was warranted. METHODS: Paper-based surveys were administered (a) to all laboratories in Canada licensed to process stool specimens and (b) to all local public health authorities in two provinces. RESULTS: Of the laboratories surveyed, 67% (n=274) conducted on-site testing of stool specimens for enteric bacteria, 31% (n=126) for parasites and 10% (n=42) for viruses. In the year 2000, these laboratories processed 459,982 stool specimens, of which 5%, 15%, 8% and 19% were positive for enteric bacteria (excluding C. difficile), C. difficile, parasites and viruses, respectively. Variations in laboratory testing and health authority reporting protocols and policies were identified. Of the laboratory-confirmed cases of AGI reported to local public health authorities, 5% (n=846) were not reported to provincial counterparts. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of AGI cases submitting stool specimens are not captured in Canada's passive surveillance system due to unknown etiology. A much smaller proportion of laboratory-confirmed cases reported to local public health authorities are not captured at the provincial or national level. Given that the number of laboratory-confirmed AGI cases represents such a small fraction of all community cases, strategies to compensate for under-reporting and efforts directed at harmonizing laboratory and local public health authority policies and practices would be welcomed.
Authors: Clifford G Clark; Eduardo Taboada; Christopher C R Grant; Connie Blakeston; Frank Pollari; Barbara Marshall; Kris Rahn; Joanne Mackinnon; Danielle Daignault; Dylan Pillai; Lai-King Ng Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Victoria A Keegan; Shannon E Majowicz; David L Pearl; Barbara J Marshall; Nancy Sittler; Lewinda Knowles; Jeffery B Wilson Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: Shannon E Majowicz; Victoria L Edge; Aamir Fazil; W Bruce McNab; Kathryn A Doré; Paul N Sockett; James A Flint; Dean Middleton; Scott A McEwen; Jeffery B Wilson Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2005 May-Jun
Authors: D L Pearl; M Louie; L Chui; K Doré; K M Grimsrud; D Leedell; S W Martin; P Michel; L W Svenson; S A McEwen Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2006-01-03 Impact factor: 2.451
Authors: Corinne J Schuster; Andrea G Ellis; William J Robertson; Dominique F Charron; Jeff J Aramini; Barbara J Marshall; Diane T Medeiros Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2005 Jul-Aug
Authors: Victoria L Edge; Frank Pollari; Lai King Ng; Pascal Michel; Scott A McEwen; Jeffrey B Wilson; Michael Jerrett; Paul N Sockett; S Wayne Martin Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: M Kate Thomas; Shannon E Majowicz; Paul N Sockett; Aamir Fazil; Frank Pollari; Kathryn Doré; James A Flint; Victoria L Edge Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: M Kate Thomas; Regan Murray; Logan Flockhart; Katarina Pintar; Frank Pollari; Aamir Fazil; Andrea Nesbitt; Barbara Marshall Journal: Foodborne Pathog Dis Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 3.171
Authors: Anne E Deckert; Richard J Reid-Smith; Susan E Tamblyn; Larry Morrell; Patrick Seliske; Frances B Jamieson; Rebecca Irwin; Catherine E Dewey; Patrick Boerlin; Scott A McEwen Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.471