| Literature DB >> 26208355 |
Wen-Yi Zhang1, Li-Ya Wang1, Xiu-Shan Zhang1, Zhi-Hai Han2, Wen-Biao Hu3, Quan Qian1, Ubydul Haque4, Ricardo J Soares Magalhaes5, Shen-Long Li1, Shi-Lu Tong3, Cheng-Yi Li1, Hai-Long Sun1, Yan-Song Sun6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the epidemic characteristics of human cutaneous anthrax (CA) in China, detect the spatiotemporal clusters at the county level for preemptive public health interventions, and evaluate the differences in the epidemiological characteristics within and outside clusters.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26208355 PMCID: PMC4514625 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133736
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Epidemic curve, seasonal pattern and temporal clusters of human cutaneous anthrax in mainland China, 2005–2012.
(A)The figure shows epidemic curve of monthly CA cases (blue line) and significant temporal clusters (red line) from 2005–2012; (B) The seasonal pattern of CA. The bottom and top of the box represents the lower quartile (P25) and the upper quartile (P75) respectively; the bottom, middle and top line is minimum, median and maximum value; dot and asterisk with number represent value of outlier and extreme outlier, respectively.
Fig 2Annual incidence of human cutaneous anthrax in mainland China, 2005–2012.
Fig 3Spatiotemporal clusters of human cutaneous anthrax in mainland China, 2005–2012.
Space-time clusters of human cutaneous anthrax in China, 2005–2012.
| Cluster | Radius(Km) | Time Frame | No. Counties | No. Obs | No. Exp | LLR | RR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 207 | 2006/07-2009/08 | 19 | 603 | 0.84 | 3421 | 879.27 |
| 2 | 49 | 2005/04-2007/11 | 6 | 195 | 1.51 | 760 | 137.18 |
| 3 | 378 | 2010/05-2012/10 | 24 | 76 | 3.54 | 161 | 21.94 |
| 4 | 91 | 2010/08 | 4 | 25 | 0.02 | 150 | 1100.99 |
| 5 | 64 | 2011/07-2011/08 | 4 | 33 | 0.13 | 149 | 250.62 |
| 6 | 0 | 2008/7-2011/8 | 1 | 9 | 0.11 | 30 | 80.79 |
No. Counties: number of counties in each cluster; No. Obs: number of observed cases; No. Exp: number of expected cases; LLR: Log Likelihood Ratios; RR: Relative Risk; Cluster 1: Primary cluster; Cluster 2–6: Secondary clusters
#P<0.05.
Incidence of human cutaneous anthrax, proportion of cases and population in spatiotemporal clusters in China, 2005–2012.
| Cluster | Time Frame | Population | Incidence | % Cases | %Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2006/07-2009/08 | 858160 | 22.17 | 40.91 | 0.07 |
| 2 | 2005/04-2007/11 | 1664107 | 4.39 | 13.72 | 0.13 |
| 3 | 2010/05-2012/10 | 5420981 | 0.56 | 8.61 | 0.42 |
| 4 | 2010/08 | 946889 | 33.00 | 34.25 | 0.07 |
| 5 | 2011/07-2011/08 | 2986631 | 6.50 | 22.00 | 0.23 |
| 6 | 2008/7-2011/8 | 128420 | 2.21 | 0.76 | 0.01 |
Incidence: cases per 100000 person year; %Population: the percentage of population living in cluster/the total population; %Cases: the percentage of cutaneous anthrax cases observed in cluster/the total cases during the same time.
Comparison of characteristics of cutaneous anthrax in high-risk counties and low-risk counties identified by Kulldorff’s space time cluster analysis in China, 2005–2012.
| Variables | High-risk counties | Low-risk counties | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster 1 | Cluster 2 | Cluster 3 | Cluster 4 | Cluster 5 | Cluster 6 | |||
| Sex | Male,% | 402 (66.67 | 168 (86.15 | 63 (82.89 | 22 (88.00) | 28 (84.85) | 8 (88.19) | 1666 (72.59) |
| Female,% | 201 (33.33) | 27 (13.85) | 13 (17.11) | 3 (12.00) | 5 (15.15) | 1 (11.11) | 629 (27.41) | |
| Age (Year) | Median (IR | 35 | 39 (28–50) | 45 | 43 | 42 | 56 | 38(27–49) |
| Occupation | Shepherd, % | 513 (85.07 | 1 (0.51) | 16 (21.05) | 4 (16.00) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 796 (34.68) |
| Farmer, % | 21 (3.48) | 185 (94.87 | 55 (72.37 | 19 (76.00 | 28 (84.85 | 8 (88.19 | 1155 (50.33) | |
| Address | Resident, % | 594 (98.51 | 195 (100.00 | 69 (90.79) | 3 (12.00) | 32 (96.97) | 8 (88.19) | 2180 (94.99) |
| Floating, % | 9 (1.49) | 0 (0.00) | 7 (9.21) | 22 (88.00 | 1 (3.03) | 1 (11.11) | 115 (5.01) | |
| Days | Median (IR) | 4.0 | 4.0 (3.0–7.0) | 5.4 | 5.4 | 7.5 | 5 (2.8–5.8) | 4.2 (2.4–7.0) |
| Deaths | No. (Mortality, %) | 1 (0.17 | 9 (4.62 | 2 (2.63) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 23 (1) |
* Significant difference with lower value in high-risk counties compared with low-risk counties (χ2 test, Fisher’s exact test or Z test with p<0.05)
# Significant difference with higher value in high-risk counties compared with low-risk counties (χ2 test or Z test with p<0.05)
✝ Interquartile range
✝ Days from illness onset to diagnosis.