4.5 Article

Epidemiology and characteristics of the dengue outbreak in Guangdong, Southern China, in 2014

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10096-015-2540-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. Guangdong Natural Science Foundation [S2013010014007, 2014A030313070]
  2. Guangdong Province Science & Technology Project Plan & Social Development Foundation [2010A030400006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dengue is a rapidly spreading mosquito-borne disease caused by the dengue virus (DENV) and has emerged as a severe public health problem around the world. Guangdong, one of the southern Chinese provinces, experienced a serious outbreak of dengue in 2014, which was believed to be the worst dengue epidemic in China over the last 20 years. To better understand the epidemic, we collected the epidemiological data of the outbreak and analyzed 14,594 clinically suspected dengue patients from 25 hospitals in Guangdong. Dengue cases were then laboratory-confirmed by the detection of DENV non-structural protein 1 (NS1) antigen and/or DENV RNA. Afterwards, clinical manifestations of dengue patients were analyzed and 93 laboratory-positive serum specimens were chosen for the DENV serotyping and molecular analysis. Our data showed that the 2014 dengue outbreak in Guangdong had spread to 20 cities and more than 45 thousand people suffered from dengue fever. Of 14,594 participants, 11,387 were definitively diagnosed. Most manifested with a typical non-severe clinical course, and 1.96 % developed to severe dengue. The strains isolated successfully from the serum samples were identified as DENV-1. Genetic analyses revealed that the strains were classified into genotypes I and V of DENV-1, and the dengue epidemic of Guangdong in 2014 was caused by indigenous cases and imported cases from the neighboring Southeast Asian countries of Malaysia and Singapore. Overall, our study is informative and significant to the 2014 dengue outbreak in Guangdong and will provide crucial implications for dengue prevention and control in China and elsewhere.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据