Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
After a large foodborne outbreak of hepatitis A in April 1974, the Minnesota Department of Health attempted to improve ongoing hepatitis surveillance with a system based on 1) a large centralized blood bank, which reports results of tests for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) on suspected hepatitis patients; 2) private physicians, who are encouraged to report cases; and 3) an epidemiology aide, who contacts all detected patients and their physicians. During the first year of this system, we detected 932 cases (24.5 per 100,000), a threefold increase over previous years, and obtained detailed epidemiologic data on each case. Although physicians diagnosed 61% of these cases as hepatitis A (or non-B) and 39% as hepatitis B, they tested only 53% of all patients for HBsAg. Sixty-seven per cent of the tested patients were HBsAg-positive, but only 17% of the untested patients had illnesses diagnosed by physicians as hepatitis B. This suggests that many patients with clinically-diagnosed viral hepatitis who are not tested for HBsAg may be erroneously diagnosed by physicians as having non-B hepatitis. Thirty-three per cent of HBsAg-positive patients with known occupations, not including housewives and students, worked in meidcally-related occupations. For 51% of the HBsAg-positive patients, we could not identify recent parenteral exposure to hepatitis B.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Levy et al. (1977) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: