| Literature DB >> 29558885 |
Jie Li1,2, Xiaoyan Lu3, Baoming Jiang3, Yiwei Du1,2, Yang Yang1,2, Haikun Qian1,2, Baiwei Liu1,2, Changying Lin1,2, Lei Jia1,2, Lijuan Chen4,5, Quanyi Wang6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human adenovirus (HAdV)-associated acute conjunctivitis is a common infectious disease and causes significant morbidity among residents in Beijing, China. However, little is known about the epidemiology and type distribution of acute adenoviral conjunctivitis in Beijing.Entities:
Keywords: Acute conjunctivitis; HAdV type; Human adenovirus
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29558885 PMCID: PMC5859447 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-018-3014-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Identification of HAdV types in outpatients with acute conjunctivitis in Beijing, 2011–2013
| 2011 ( | 2012 ( | 2013 ( | Total ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Type | n(%) | n(%) | n(%) | n(%) |
| B | HAdV-3 | 10(8.4) | 10((8.0) | 6(5.7) | 26(7.4) |
| HAdV-7 | 10((8.4) | 7(5.6) | 2(1.9) | 19(5.4) | |
| HAdV-11 | 1(0.8) | 1(0.8) | 2(1.9) | 4(1.1) | |
| HAdV-14 | 0(0.0) | 0(0.0) | 1(1.0) | 1(0.3) | |
| C | HAdV-1 | 0(0.0) | 2(1.6) | 0(0.0) | 2(0.6) |
| HAdV-2 | 0(0.0) | 0(0.0) | 2(1.9) | 2(0.6) | |
| HAdV-5 | 1(0.8) | 0(0.0) | 0(0.0) | 1(0.3) | |
| D | HAdV-37 | 25(21.0) | 24(19.2) | 12(11.4) | 61(17.5) |
| HAdV-64 | 23(19.3) | 13(10.4) | 15(14.3) | 51(14.6) | |
| HAdV-8 | 13(10.9) | 16(12.8) | 18(17.1) | 47(13.5) | |
| HAdV-42 | 0(0.0) | 0(0.0) | 1(1.0) | 1(0.3) | |
| HAdV-48 | 0(0.0) | 0(0.0) | 2(1.9) | 2(0.6) | |
| HAdV-53 | 21(17.6) | 16(12.8) | 22(21.0) | 59(16.9) | |
| HAdV-56 | 0(0.0) | 1(0.8) | 0(0.0) | 1(0.3) | |
| E | HAdV-4 | 14(11.8) | 34(27.2) | 17(16.2) | 65(18.6) |
| Untyped | 1(0.8) | 1(0.8) | 5(4.8) | 7(2.0) |
Factors associated with HAdV infection in patients with acute conjunctivitis
| Category | Conjunctivitis cases, N | HAdV Positive n (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||
| Male | 484 | 203 (41.9) | 0.158 |
| Female | 392 | 146 (37.2) | |
| Age group (year)a | |||
| 0–6 | 36 | 14 (38.9) |
|
| 7–17 | 58 | 23 (39.7) | |
| 18–40 | 479 | 222 (46.3) | |
| 41–65 | 233 | 78 (33.5) | |
| ≥ 66 | 70 | 12 (17.1) | |
| Occupation | |||
| Children in daycare | 15 | 6 (40.0) |
|
| Children stay-at-home | 17 | 8 (47.1) | |
| Student | 89 | 32 (36.0) | |
| Teacher | 21 | 9 (42.9) | |
| Food and beverage server | 26 | 16 (61.5) | |
| Commercial service personnel | 83 | 36 (43.4) | |
| Physician | 20 | 3 (15.0) | |
| Laborer | 136 | 71(52.2) | |
| Farmer | 85 | 24 (28.2) | |
| Government employee | 87 | 34 (39.1) | |
| Retired people | 100 | 22 (22.0) | |
| Unemployed | 84 | 33 (39.3) | |
| Other | 113 | 55 (48.7) | |
| Geographic distribution | |||
| Urban | 404 | 160 (39.6) | 0.859 |
| Suburban | 472 | 189 (40.0) | |
| Studentb | |||
| Summer vacation (Jul-Aug) | 53 | 19 (35.8) | 0.980 |
| School term (Sep-Oct) | 36 | 13 (36.1) | |
| Contact history with a conjunctivitis casec | |||
| Yes | 83 | 51 (61.4) |
|
| No | 659 | 240 (36.4) | |
| Sampling day after symptom onsetd | |||
| 1st | 156 | 46 (29.5) |
|
| 2nd | 191 | 51 (26.7) | |
| 3rd | 155 | 60 (38.7) | |
| 4th | 131 | 68 (51.9) | |
| 5th | 70 | 42 (60.0) | |
| 6th | 39 | 22 (56.4) | |
| 7th | 25 | 11 (44.0) | |
| ≥ 8th | 88 | 28 (31.8) | |
aAge was divided into 5 groups according to age segmentation in China
bA total of 89 students were included in this analysis
c134 patients were not sure if they had a contact history and were excluded from analysis. A total of 742 patients were included in this analysis
d21 mixed-infection cases were observed in this study and was excluded from analysis. A total of 855 patients were included in the analysis.Associations between risk factors and HAdV infection were done by univariate analysis
eP-value was conducted by Pearson’s χ2. The bold values means significant difference was obtained between or among compared groups
Multiple logistic regression analysis of factors associated with HAdV infection in patients with acute conjunctivitis
| Variables |
| aORb (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.816 | 1.037 (0.762–1.413) |
| Age group (year) | ||
| 0–6 | 0.832 | 0.769 (0.068–8.695) |
| 7–17 | 0.079 | 2.692 (0.891–8.137) |
| 18–40 |
|
|
| 41–65 | 0.129 | 1.802 (0.842–3.857) |
| ≥ 66 | Ref | |
| Occupations | ||
| Preschool children and kindergarten children | 0.060 | 13.533 (0.895–204.588) |
| Student | 0.127 | 3.010 (0.732–12.382) |
| Teacher | 0.075 | 4.147 (0.867–19.842) |
| Food and beverage server |
|
|
| Commercial service personnel |
|
|
| Laborer |
|
|
| Farmer | 0.138 | 2.845 (0.715–11.327) |
| Government employee | 0.074 | 3.433 (0.889–13.257) |
| Retired people | 0.235 | 2.369 (0.571–9.839) |
| Unemployed | 0.064 | 3.585 (0.927–13.874) |
| Others |
|
|
| Physician | Ref | |
| Sampling day after symptom onset | ||
| 1st and 2nd | Ref | |
| 3rd |
|
|
| 4th |
|
|
| 5th |
|
|
| 6th |
|
|
| 7th | 0.128 | 1.956 (0.825–4.640) |
| ≥ 8th | 0.736 | 1.093 (0.644–1.865) |
| Contact history with a conjunctivitis case | ||
| Not sure whether there was a contact history | 0.092 | 1.423 (0.944–2.145) |
| Yes |
| 2.380 (1.420–3.990) |
| No | Ref | |
apatients with mixed-infection were excluded
bmultivariate-adjusted OR (aOR) calculated after controlling for other significant factors and gender. The bold values means significant difference was obtained when this group was compared with the reference group
Analysis of the demographic information among different HAdV types
| Characteristics ( | HAdV-4 | HAdV-37 | HAdV-53 | HAdV-64 | HAdV-8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||||
| Male ( | 27 (16.0) | 44 (26.0) | 39 (23.1) | 32 (18.9) | 27 (16.0) |
|
| Female ( | 37 (32.5) | 18 (15.8) | 20 (17.5) | 19 (16.7) | 20 (17.5) | |
| Age group(year) | ||||||
| 0–6 ( | 5 (45.5) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (18.2) | 2 (18.2) | 2(18.2) | 0.228 |
| 7–17 ( | 8 (44.4) | 3 (16.7) | 2 (11.1) | 1 (5.6) | 4 (22.2) | 0.157 |
| 18–40 ( | 38 (21.0) | 43 (23.8) | 37 (20.4) | 34(18.8) | 29 (16.0) | 0.796 |
| 41–65 ( | 11 (16.2) | 14 (20.6) | 17 (25.0) | 14 (20.6) | 12 (17.6) | 0.590 |
| ≥ 66 ( | 2 (40.0) | 2 (40.0) | 1 (20.0) | 0(0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0.951 |
aP-value was conducted by Pearson’s χ2, Fisher’s exact test. The bold values means statistically significance was obtained among compared groups