Saf Health Work.  2015 Dec;6(4):353-356. 10.1016/j.shaw.2015.07.009.

A Case-Study of Implementation of Improved Strategies for Prevention of Laboratory-acquired Brucellosis

• Castrodale LJ
• Raczniak G
• Rudolph KM
• Chikoyak L
• Cox RS
• Franklin T
• Traxler RM
• Guerra M

• KMID: 2317217
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.07.009

Abstract

BACKGROUND
In 2012, the Alaska Section of Epidemiology investigated personnel potentially exposed to a Brucella suis isolate as it transited through three laboratories.
METHODS
We summarize the first implementation of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2013 revised recommendations for monitoring such exposures: (1) risk classification; (2) antimicrobial postexposure prophylaxis; (3) serologic monitoring; and (4) symptom surveillance.
RESULTS
Over 30 people were assessed for exposure and subsequently monitored for development of illness. No cases of laboratory-associated brucellosis occurred. Changes were made to gaps in laboratory biosafety practices that had been identified in the investigation.
CONCLUSION
Achieving full compliance for the precise schedule of serologic monitoring was challenging and resource intensive for the laboratory performing testing. More refined exposure assessments could inform decision making for follow-up to maximize likelihood of detecting persons at risk while not overtaxing resources.

Keyword

Alaska; brucellosis; laboratory-acquired infections; laboratory-associated brucellosis; laboratory biosafety

MeSH Terms

Alaska
Appointments and Schedules
Brucella suis
Brucellosis*
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.)
Classification
Compliance
Decision Making
Epidemiology
Follow-Up Studies
Humans