To determine whether environmental surveillance of West Nile virus–positive dead birds, mosquito pools, equines, and sentinel chickens helped predict human cases in metropolitan Denver, Colorado, during 2003, we analyzed human surveillance data and environmental data. Birds successfully predicted the highest proportion of human cases, followed by mosquito pools, and equines.
The United States has experienced numerous locale-specific West Nile virus (WNV) epidemics since the infection was first identified in New York in 1999 (
Tri-County Health Department (TCHD), a local public health agency in metropolitan Denver, Colorado, serves >1 million people in Adams, Arapahoe, and Douglas Counties, and spans urban and rural regions. In response to the anticipated arrival of WNV, the state of Colorado added WNV serologic testing to its existing sentinel chicken surveillance (which included serologic testing for western equine encephalitis and St Louis encephalitis), and initiated surveillance of mosquito pools, dead birds, and equines. This retrospective study aims to utilize both epidemiologic and spatial tools to determine whether the enhanced environmental surveillance system was able to predict human infections in space and time during an epidemic year of WNV activity. In addition, this study assesses whether predictability differed by urban/rural location and month of onset of human disease.
Since 2002, healthcare providers and laboratories have been required to report patients with laboratory evidence of acute WNV infection in Colorado if testing identified WNV-specific immunoglobulin M antibodies in either cerebral spinal fluid or serum by ELISA, or blood donors with a positive nucleic acid test result. In addition to laboratory confirmation, patients had to exhibit clinical features consistent with an acute WNV infection, including encephalitis, meningitis, flaccid paralysis, or WNV fever; detailed case definitions have previously been described (
Environmental data included specimens of birds, mosquito pools, equines, and sentinel chickens that were tested for WNV. Bird oral swab specimens and mosquito pools were tested by reverse transcription–PCR or VecTest (Medical Analysis Systems, Inc., Camarillo, CA, USA) at Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s (CDPHE) laboratory or regional local health department laboratories. Equine specimens were tested at the Department of Agriculture and Colorado State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratories on a fee-for-service basis by IgM antibody capture–ELISA (MAC-ELISA) at a 1:400 dilution to eliminate false-positive results due to vaccination (
A total of 408 human WNV cases were reported in Adams, Arapahoe, and Douglas Counties during 2003. TCHD’s environmental surveillance system identified 109 (50.0%) of 218 birds that tested positive for WNV, 62 (54.9%) of 113 equines that tested positive, 58 (21.7%) of 267 mosquito pools that tested positive, and 45 (12.7%) of 354 sentinel chickens that tested positive. Geographic locations were determined for all but 4 (99.0%) of the infected humans, for 96.0% of environmental species with positive results, and for 97.4% of environmental species with negative results. Human and environmental surveillance data were mapped in ArcView, version 3.3 (ESRI, Redlands, CA, USA) (
Human infections and positive environmental results, Adams, Arapahoe, and Douglas Counties, Colorado, 2003.
To determine whether environmental surveillance was more accurate at predicting human cases by urban than rural location and month of human infection onset, we calculated the proportions of human cases that were successfully predicted. Urban regions were identified as those census tracts with densities
Overall, the 4 types of environmental surveillance were able to predict 64.6% of all reported human cases of WNV infection (
| Total no. human infections | No. (%) human Infections successfully predicted by | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any environmental specimen | Birds | Mosquito pools | Equines | Sentinel chickens | ||
| Region | ||||||
| Urban (reference value) | 292 | 202 (69.2) | 176 (60.3) | 51 (17.5) | 35 (12.0) | 3 (0.9) |
| Rural | 112 | 59 (52.7)* | 30 (26.8)* | 28 (25.0) | 21 (18.8) | 1 (1.0) |
| Onset date† | ||||||
| June/July | 79 | 28 (35.4)* | 17 (21.5)* | 9 (11.4)* | 8 (10.1) | 0 |
| August | 273 | 196 (71.8) | 157 (57.5) | 54 (19.8) | 41 (15.0) | 4 (1.5) |
| September (reference value) | 47 | 34 (72.3) | 30 (63.8) | 14 (29.8) | 6 (12.8) | 0 |
| Total | 404‡ | 261 (64.6) | 206 (51.0) | 79 (19.6) | 56 (13.9) | 4 (1.0) |
*Significant at the p = 0.05 level. †Five human case-patients had missing onset date. ‡Four human case-patients could not be geo-located.
To validate our findings, we assessed the data in a different manner to determine how well positive environmental results predicted human infections and how well negative environmental results predicted the absence of human infections. Similar to the previous analysis, the spatial cutoff was 2 km, and the temporal threshold for environmental positive results was any time before, and up to, the time of human infection onset. Environmental negative results were expected to be followed by no human infections for at least 2 weeks. In this analysis, 50.8% of positive environmental results were followed by a human infection at some point after the environmental positive result was detected, and 86.0% of negative environmental results were followed by a lack of human cases for at least the next 2 weeks (
| Specimens | No. human infections/ environmental-positive results (%) | No. human infections/ environmental-negative results (%) |
|---|---|---|
| All specimens | 133/262 (50.8) | 591/687 (86.0) |
| Birds | 62/105 (59.0) | 82/98 (83.7) |
| Mosquito pools | 38/57 (66.7) | 154/203 (75.9) |
| Equines | 17/55 (30.9) | 30/32 (93.8) |
| Sentinel chickens | 16/45 (35.6) | 325/354 (91.8) |
This study evaluated whether resources dedicated to environmental surveillance for the detection of WNV activity can predict human cases. More specifically, we assessed the predictability of 4 different types of environmental surveillance to identify where and when these methods were most successful in predicting human infections.
Overall, an environmental indicator preceded almost two thirds of human infections, and half of positive environmental results were followed by a human infection. Although more tests were performed for sentinel chickens and mosquito pools, birds were better predictors of human infections. Because bird surveillance depends on the public identifying and bringing in birds for testing, bird surveillance was dramatically more accurate in urban areas with high human population densities. Sentinel chicken surveillance had extremely low predictive success, which supports the subsequent decision to discontinue this surveillance method in Colorado in 2004.
This study uses a combination of epidemiologic and geographic tools to analyze WNV data spatially, temporally, and categorically. These findings would be valid when sufficient environmental samples with accurate geo-location data are submitted for testing. As with any surveillance system, environmental surveillance is likely to be more predictive during epidemic levels of virus transmission. However, the goal of state and county WNV surveillance is not to document endemic virus circulation, but rather predict increased risk for human transmission and epidemic level activity in time to initiate public notification and preventive measures.
Several other studies have illustrated the utility of dead bird testing (
We thank Tri-County Health Department’s disease control, environmental health, and public health nursing staff who assisted in WNV surveillance, particularly, Laura DeGolier, who coordinated the human surveillance, and Monte Deatrich, who coordinated the environmental surveillance. In addition, we thank John Pape for his statewide coordination efforts.
Dr Patnaik is the Epidemiology Program Manager at Tri-County Health Department, in metro-Denver, Colorado. Currently, she coordinates agencywide epidemiologic research and is also involved in communicable disease and emergency preparedness activities.