Cargando…

Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing

INTRODUCTION: In outbreak settings, more than one virus may be infecting the given population. In twin or triple outbreak of measles, German measles (rubella), and varicella in highly immunized hilly areas, maximal number of the case patients in all the hilly villages belonged to the older age group...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Surender Nikhil, Gupta, Naveen, Gupta, Shivani
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4776610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26985417
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.174290
_version_ 1782419175309836288
author Gupta, Surender Nikhil
Gupta, Naveen
Gupta, Shivani
author_facet Gupta, Surender Nikhil
Gupta, Naveen
Gupta, Shivani
author_sort Gupta, Surender Nikhil
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: In outbreak settings, more than one virus may be infecting the given population. In twin or triple outbreak of measles, German measles (rubella), and varicella in highly immunized hilly areas, maximal number of the case patients in all the hilly villages belonged to the older age group. It suggested an obvious shift to the higher age group, warranting second dose opportunity in such case scenario. The clinical presentations of viral diseases are too similar to differentiate. The aim is to clearly categorize the case patients of modified measles, rubella, and atypical measles in outbreak settings. RESULTS: Four outbreaks are listed. In the first one, sixty case patients were identified from 1026 people in 5 villages. Of these, 41 were diagnosed by clinically, 8 were laboratory confirmed as measles and 11 were epidemiologically linked German measles case patients. Seventy percent of the cases were vaccinated for measles. In second case, we identified 29/35 measles and 6/35 were confirmed as epidemiologically linked unvaccinated chickenpox case patients. In third one, we identified 116 cases in eight villages (112/116 clinically and 04/116 laboratory confirmed). Majority of cases were immunized against measles, but only minor cases for rubella. In fourth case, we identified 505 case patients from mixed outbreaks of varicella, measles and rubella (30/505 clinically, 467/505 epidemiologically linked and 8/505 laboratory confirmed case patients from a study population of 3280). In all the four outbreaks, prima facie, the clinical presentations of both rubella and modified measles were difficult to differentiate. DISCUSSION: On the basis of outbreak investigation and analytical inference, it has been observed that the symtomatology of modified measles and laboratory confirmed rubella case patients/epidemiologically linked cases are so similar placed that many a time, it becomes much difficult to line list the cases in one section of modified measles or rubella or atypical cases. CONCLUSION: Similarities of morphological symptoms between modified measles and rubella is the point of challenge and it causes debate between pediatrician and field epidemiologist to differentiate and classify them.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4776610
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47766102016-03-16 Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing Gupta, Surender Nikhil Gupta, Naveen Gupta, Shivani J Family Med Prim Care Original Article INTRODUCTION: In outbreak settings, more than one virus may be infecting the given population. In twin or triple outbreak of measles, German measles (rubella), and varicella in highly immunized hilly areas, maximal number of the case patients in all the hilly villages belonged to the older age group. It suggested an obvious shift to the higher age group, warranting second dose opportunity in such case scenario. The clinical presentations of viral diseases are too similar to differentiate. The aim is to clearly categorize the case patients of modified measles, rubella, and atypical measles in outbreak settings. RESULTS: Four outbreaks are listed. In the first one, sixty case patients were identified from 1026 people in 5 villages. Of these, 41 were diagnosed by clinically, 8 were laboratory confirmed as measles and 11 were epidemiologically linked German measles case patients. Seventy percent of the cases were vaccinated for measles. In second case, we identified 29/35 measles and 6/35 were confirmed as epidemiologically linked unvaccinated chickenpox case patients. In third one, we identified 116 cases in eight villages (112/116 clinically and 04/116 laboratory confirmed). Majority of cases were immunized against measles, but only minor cases for rubella. In fourth case, we identified 505 case patients from mixed outbreaks of varicella, measles and rubella (30/505 clinically, 467/505 epidemiologically linked and 8/505 laboratory confirmed case patients from a study population of 3280). In all the four outbreaks, prima facie, the clinical presentations of both rubella and modified measles were difficult to differentiate. DISCUSSION: On the basis of outbreak investigation and analytical inference, it has been observed that the symtomatology of modified measles and laboratory confirmed rubella case patients/epidemiologically linked cases are so similar placed that many a time, it becomes much difficult to line list the cases in one section of modified measles or rubella or atypical cases. CONCLUSION: Similarities of morphological symptoms between modified measles and rubella is the point of challenge and it causes debate between pediatrician and field epidemiologist to differentiate and classify them. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4776610/ /pubmed/26985417 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.174290 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gupta, Surender Nikhil
Gupta, Naveen
Gupta, Shivani
Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title_full Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title_fullStr Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title_full_unstemmed Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title_short Modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: One and same thing
title_sort modified measles versus rubella versus atypical measles: one and same thing
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4776610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26985417
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.174290
work_keys_str_mv AT guptasurendernikhil modifiedmeaslesversusrubellaversusatypicalmeaslesoneandsamething
AT guptanaveen modifiedmeaslesversusrubellaversusatypicalmeaslesoneandsamething
AT guptashivani modifiedmeaslesversusrubellaversusatypicalmeaslesoneandsamething