Responding to avian influenza A H5N1 detection on a hospital property in Maine-An interdisciplinary approach.

BACKGROUND: The risk of infection with avian influenza A viruses currently circulating in wild and domestic birds in the Americas is considered low for the general public; however, detections in humans have been reported and warning signs of increased zoonotic potential have been identified. In December 2022, two Canada geese residing on the grounds of an urban hospital in Maine tested positive for influenza A H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b. AIMS: Given the opportunity for exposure to staff and hospital visitors through potentially infected faeces on the property, public health authorities determined mitigation efforts were needed to prevent the spread of disease. The ensuing response relied on collaboration between the public health and animal health agencies to guide the hospital through efforts in preventing possible zoonotic transmission to humans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mitigation efforts included staff communication and education, environmental cleaning and disinfection, enhanced illness surveillance among staff and patients, and exposure and source reduction. RESULTS: No human H5N1 cases were identified, and no additional detections in birds on the property occurred. Hospital staff identified barriers to preparedness resulting from a lack of understanding of avian influenza A viruses and transmission prevention methods, including avian influenza risk in resident wild bird populations and proper wildlife management methods. CONCLUSION: As this virus continues to circulate at the animal-human interface, this event and resulting response highlights the need for influenza A H5N1 risk awareness and guidance for facilities and groups not traditionally involved in avian influenza responses.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of veterinary facility owners regarding rabies preexposure prophylaxis--West Virginia, 2011.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding rabies preexposure prophylaxis among veterinary facility owners in West Virginia and to compare facilities in counties where raccoon rabies virus variant (RRVV) is or is not enzootic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional telephone survey. SAMPLE: 124 owners of facilities licensed by the West Virginia Board of Veterinary Medicine. PROCEDURES: In 2011, an owner of each licensed facility in West Virginia was contacted by telephone to complete a questionnaire regarding practice demographics, knowledge of rabies epidemiology, and preexposure prophylaxis policies. Data from facilities in counties where RRVV is enzootic were compared with data from facilities in counties where RRVV is not enzootic. Prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to quantify the strength of associations. RESULTS: Owners of 124 of the 162 (77%) veterinary facilities participated in the survey. West Virginia veterinarians were knowledgeable of rabies epidemiology in the state. Respondents agreed that veterinarians (122/124 [98%]) and technicians and assistants (111/124 [90%]) should receive preexposure prophylaxis. Fifty-six (45%) respondents required that veterinarians receive preexposure prophylaxis, whereas 19 (15%) respondents required that technicians and assistants receive preexposure prophylaxis. A preexposure prophylaxis policy was in effect at 20 of 64 (31%) facilities in counties where RRVV is enzootic and 6 of 60 (10%) facilities in counties where RRVV is not enzootic. Concerns related to cost of preexposure prophylaxis were reported. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Except for veterinarians, veterinary staff in West Virginia did not commonly receive preexposure prophylaxis or regular assessments of serum rabies virus neutralizing antibody titers. All veterinary practices are encouraged to consider revising or implementing a preexposure prophylaxis policy based on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' recommendations.

Canine cyanotoxin poisonings in the United States (1920s-2012): review of suspected and confirmed cases from three data sources.

Cyanobacteria (also called blue-green algae) are ubiquitous in aquatic environments. Some species produce potent toxins that can sicken or kill people, domestic animals, and wildlife. Dogs are particularly vulnerable to cyanotoxin poisoning because of their tendency to swim in and drink contaminated water during algal blooms or to ingestalgal mats.. Here, we summarize reports of suspected or confirmed canine cyanotoxin poisonings in the U.S. from three sources: (1) The Harmful Algal Bloom-related Illness Surveillance System (HABISS) of the National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); (2) Retrospective case files from a large, regional veterinary hospital in California; and (3) Publicly available scientific and medical manuscripts; written media; and web-based reports from pet owners, veterinarians, and other individuals. We identified 231 discreet cyanobacteria harmful algal bloom (cyanoHAB) events and 368 cases of cyanotoxin poisoning associated with dogs throughout the U.S. between the late 1920s and 2012. The canine cyanotoxin poisoning events reviewed here likely represent a small fraction of cases that occur throughout the U.S. each year.