Seroprevalence and risk factors of avian influenza H9 virus among poultry professionals in Rawalpindi, Pakistan

Tahir, Muhammad Farooq; Abbas, Muhammad; Ghafoor, Tamkeen; Dil, Saima; Shahid, Muhammad Akbar; Bullo, Mir Muhammad Hassan; Ain, Qurat ul; Ranjha, Muazam Abbas; Khan, Mumtaz Ali; Naseem, Muhammad Tahir

doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2018.11.009

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the contrary, H9 is a low pathogenic subtype with endemic status in Pakistan (41), enabling repeated reinfections of the same birds and increasing seroprevalence (42). Furthermore, due to extensive biosecurity measures and the presence of inactivated vaccines in commercial poultry (11,43), subtypes H5 and H7 have not been reported in commercial poultry in Pakistan since their last outbreak in 2008 (44), which might be attributed to their low or negligible seroprevalence in our survey.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Serosurvey of Avian Influenza Viruses (H5, H7, and H9) and Associated Risk Factors in Backyard Poultry Flocks of Lahore District, Pakistan

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural poultry constitutes 56% of the total poultry population in Pakistan; however, epidemiological information about avian influenza viruses (AIVs) in backyard poultry flocks is lacking. A cross-sectional survey of villages of Lahore district was conducted from July 2009 to August 2009 using two-stage cluster sampling and probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling to estimate seroprevalence and its associated risk factors. A random selection of 35 clusters from 308 villages of Lahore were considered, and from each cluster, six chickens aged >2 months were selected. A total of 210 serum samples were collected and examined by the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test for specific antibodies against AIV subtypes H5, H7, and H9. Overall weighted seroprevalence for AIVs was 65.2% (95% CI: 55.6–74.8%), and for subtype H5, H7 & H9 was 6.9% (95% CI: 10.8–23.0%), 0% (95% CI: 0–1.7%), and 62.0% (95% CI: 52.2–71.8%) respectively. However, none of the samples were positive for H7. The average flock size was 17.3 birds, and the main purpose of keeping poultry was for eggs/meat (70.6%, 95% CI: 59.7–81.4). A majority of them were reared in a semi-caged system (83%, 95% CI: 74.5–91.3). Backyard birds were received from different sources, that is, purchased from the market or received as a gift from friends or any NGO, and were 5.7 times more likely to become avian influenza (AI) seropositive than those that were not exposed to these sources (CI 95%: 2.0–716.0). Backyard birds which were received from different sources, that is, purchased from the market or received from friends or any NGO, were 5.7 times more likely to become AI seropositive compared to those that were not (CI 95%: 2.5–18.7). To reduce the risk of AIV in Pakistan, continuous surveillance of backyard poultry would be needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Serosurvey of Avian Influenza Viruses (H5, H7, and H9) and Associated Risk Factors in Backyard Poultry Flocks of Lahore District, Pakistan

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among four case-control (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.84; I 2 = 77%) and eight cross-sectional studies (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45-0.85; I 2 = 95%), pooled data suggested that face-mask wearing was protective, but effects were highly heterogeneous. Of the cross-sectional studies, Tahir et al [38] and Zein [39] were noticeable outliers. Removal of these outliers still indicates face-mask wearing as protective, although no longer significant, and heterogeneity falls slightly (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.78-1.01; I 2 = 64%, data not shown).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Very few of the observational studies collected information about what type of face covering was used. Several studies highlight potential problems of recall bias [27,38,45]. Other studies note that potential confounding factors were not explored [42,46,47].…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Community use of face masks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID-19: a rapid scoping review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Evidence for face-mask wearing in the community to protect against respiratory disease is unclear. Aim To assess effectiveness of wearing face masks in the community to prevent respiratory disease, and recommend improvements to this evidence base. Methods We systematically searched Scopus, Embase and MEDLINE for studies evaluating respiratory disease incidence after face-mask wearing (or not). Narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis of attack rates for primary and secondary prevention were performed, subgrouped by design, setting, face barrier type, and who wore the mask. Preferred outcome was influenza-like illness. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) quality assessment was undertaken and evidence base deficits described. Results 33 studies (12 randomised control trials (RCTs)) were included. Mask wearing reduced primary infection by 6% (odds ratio (OR): 0.94; 95% CI: 0.75–1.19 for RCTs) to 61% (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.32–2.27; OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18–0.84 and OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45–0.85 for cohort, case–control and cross-sectional studies respectively). RCTs suggested lowest secondary attack rates when both well and ill household members wore masks (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.48–1.37). While RCTs might underestimate effects due to poor compliance and controls wearing masks, observational studies likely overestimate effects, as mask wearing might be associated with other risk-averse behaviours. GRADE was low or very low quality. Conclusion Wearing face masks may reduce primary respiratory infection risk, probably by 6–15%. It is important to balance evidence from RCTs and observational studies when their conclusions widely differ and both are at risk of significant bias. COVID-19-specific studies are required.

show abstract

“…Previous surveillance studies have reported the prevalence of AIV in Lahore, where low pathogenic A(H9N2) viruses have frequently been identified in domestic and commercial poultry [27,28,30,31,58]. The circulation of A(H9N2) has led to the generation of novel genotypes, increasing the risks of AIV infection in poultry and related occupational workers such as butchers and vaccinators [29,59,60].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Surveillance studies in Pakistan have frequently described the prevalence and evolutionary relationships of avian A(H9N2) viruses since 1990s, as the virus is endemically circulating in the poultry population [27][28][29][30][31]; however, avian influenza A(H5) virus is not well understood within the country. In 2006, HPAI A(H5N1) virus was first reported in commercial layer and breeder farms and was associated with subsequent outbreaks in domestic poultry in 2007-2008 [32,33].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Characterization of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N8) Virus in Pakistani Live Bird Markets Reveals Rapid Diversification of Clade 2.3.4.4b Viruses

Ali

Yaqub

Shahid

et al. 2021

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The highly pathogenic (HPAI) avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses have undergone reassortment with multiple non-N1-subtype neuraminidase genes since 2008, leading to the emergence of H5Nx viruses. H5Nx viruses established themselves quickly in birds and disseminated from China to Africa, the Middle East, Europe and North America. Multiple genetic clades have successively evolved through frequent mutations and reassortment, posing a continuous threat to domestic poultry and causing substantial economic losses. Live bird markets are recognized as major sources of avian-to-human infection and for the emergence of zoonotic influenza. In Pakistan, the A(H5N1) virus was first reported in domestic birds in 2007; however, avian influenza surveillance is limited and there is a lack of knowledge on the evolution and transmission of the A(H5) virus in the country. We collected oropharyngeal swabs from domestic poultry and environmental samples from six different live bird markets during 2018–2019. We detected and sequenced HPAI A(H5N8) viruses from two chickens, one quail and one environmental sample in two markets. Temporal phylogenetics indicated that all novel HPAI A(H5N8) viruses belonged to clade 2.3.4.4b, with all eight genes of Pakistan A(H5N8) viruses most closely related to 2017 Saudi Arabia A(H5N8) viruses, which were likely introduced via cross-border transmission from neighboring regions approximately three months prior to virus detection into domestic poultry. Our data further revealed that clade 2.3.4.4b viruses underwent rapid lineage expansion in 2017 and acquired significant amino acid mutations, including mutations associated with increased haemagglutinin affinity to human α-2,6 receptors, prior to the first human A(H5N8) infection in Russian poultry workers in 2020. These results highlight the need for systematic avian influenza surveillance in live bird markets in Pakistan to monitor for potential A(H5Nx) variants that may arise from poultry populations.

show abstract

Seroprevalence and risk factors of avian influenza H9 virus among poultry professionals in Rawalpindi, Pakistan

Cited by 10 publications

References 15 publications

Serosurvey of Avian Influenza Viruses (H5, H7, and H9) and Associated Risk Factors in Backyard Poultry Flocks of Lahore District, Pakistan

Serosurvey of Avian Influenza Viruses (H5, H7, and H9) and Associated Risk Factors in Backyard Poultry Flocks of Lahore District, Pakistan

Community use of face masks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID-19: a rapid scoping review

Genetic Characterization of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N8) Virus in Pakistani Live Bird Markets Reveals Rapid Diversification of Clade 2.3.4.4b Viruses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About