Key result
Dormitory contact drives Coxsackie B1 transmission, with ~18% of susceptible boys developing antibodies.
Why the study?
The relative importance of dormitory versus day-to-day contacts in the spread of Coxsackie B1 infection was unclear.
Observational
No
May inform isolation in pediatric group settings; extends transmission data but remains hypothesis-generating at Level 3.
During June and July 1977 5 junior boys in a boarding school for 800 pupils became ill with a mild infection caused by Coxsackie B1. The school had been taking part in a vaccine trial, and paired blood samples had been taken from new entrants in October 1976 and October 1977. 18% of the boys susceptible to the infection developed antibodies. The results suggest that dormitories are more important than the day-to-day contacts in the spread of infection. The advisability of nursing children with known or suspected enterovirus infections in open wards in hospital is questioned.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoskins et al. (1979) conducted an observational in Coxsackie B1 infection. Dormitory contact vs. Day-to-day contact was evaluated on Development of antibodies to Coxsackie B1. Dormitory contact was more important than day-to-day contact in spreading Coxsackie B1, with 18% of susceptible boys developing antibodies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: