Disease risks from foods, England and Wales, 1996-2000.

Data from population-based studies and national surveillance systems were collated and analyzed to estimate the impact of disease and risks associated with eating different foods in England and Wales. From 1996 to 2000, an estimated 1,724,315 cases of indigenous foodborne disease per year resulted in 21,997 hospitalizations and 687 deaths. The greatest impact on the healthcare sector arose from foodborne Campylobacter infection (160,788 primary care visits and 15,918 hospitalizations), while salmonellosis caused the most deaths (209). The most important cause of indigenous foodborne disease was contaminated chicken (398,420 cases, risk [cases/million servings] = 111, case-fatality rate [deaths/100,000 cases] = 35, deaths = 141). Red meat (beef, lamb, and pork) contributed heavily to deaths, despite lower levels of risk (287,485 cases, risk = 24, case-fatality rate = 57, deaths = 164). Reducing the impact of indigenous foodborne disease is mainly dependent on controlling the contamination of chicken.

**********

Foodborne infection is a major cause of illness and death worldwide (1-4). Recognizing this, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed its Global Strategy for Food Safety (1). In the developing world, foodborne infection leads to the death of many children (2), and the resulting diarrheal disease can have long-term effects on children's growth as well as on their physical and cognitive development (5,6). In the industrialized world, foodborne infection causes considerable illness, heavily affecting healthcare systems (3,4).

The WHO Global Strategy for Food Safety acknowledges, "Effective control of foodborne disease must be based on evaluated information about foodborne hazards and the incidence of foodborne disease." Estimates of the contributions of specific pathogens to the overall extent of foodborne infection at a national level are available (3,4). We refined the techniques used to estimate the acute health effects and the risks associated with consuming different foods. Our analyses should inform evidence-based control strategies for foodborne infection.

Methods

Indigenous Foodborne Disease

Indigenous foodborne disease is defined as food-related infectious gastroenteritis acquired and occurring in England and Wales. We derived pathogen-specific estimates for indigenous foodborne disease (Table 1) by using the method of Adak et al. (4) for the following 5 disease parameters: all disease, case-patients seen at a primary care setting (by general practitioners), hospitalizations, hospital occupancy, and deaths (online Appendix 1, stages A-C; available from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol11no3/04-0191_appl.htm).

Foods Causing Indigenous Foodborne Disease

Outbreaks reported as foodborne, involving a single vehicle of infection and identified by epidemiologic or microbiologic investigations (N = 766, online Appendix 2; available from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol11no3/04-0191_app2.htm), were extracted from the National Surveillance Database for General Outbreaks of Infectious Intestinal Disease (GSURV) (7). Reported outbreaks in which investigators implicated either no (n = 612) or >1 (n = 234) vehicle of infection were excluded from these analyses. We also excluded outbreaks in which no pathogen was confirmed by laboratory testing (n = 113), although most of these outbreaks were suspected to be due to norovirus and were also linked to the same range of vehicles of infection. Foods were classified into broad food groups, such as poultry, and more specific food types, e.g., chicken (Table 2). A "complex foods" group was created to accommodate dishes consisting of ingredients of various food types in which the precise source of infection was not verified.

We calculated the percentage of outbreaks due to each food type for each pathogen. For disease of unknown origin, we used the percentages as determined above for disease due to all known pathogens. These percentages were applied to the pathogen-specific estimates for the mean values for all disease, visits to general practitioners, hospitalizations, hospital occupancy, and deaths for the years 1996-2000 to produce pathogen-specific totals by food type for each of the 5 disease parameters used to describe the annual disease impact (Tables 2 and 3, Online Appendix 1, stage D). We then calculated food-specific totals for all disease, visits to general practitioners, hospitalizations, hospital occupancy, and deaths by adding together the appropriate food-specific totals for each pathogen (Online Appendix 1, stage E).

Food-Specific Risk

The U.K. Government National Food Survey (8) collects population-based food consumption data. These data were used to calculate the number of servings of each food type consumed per resident for the period 1996-2000. These denominators were used to calculate food-specific risks, expressed as cases per million servings for all disease and hospitalizations per billion servings (Table 4, Online Appendix 1, stage F).

Quality of Evidence

Each of the above steps was classified according to whether the pathogen-specific data elements used were direct measures, extrapolations, or inferences (Table 5). This classification system permitted us to evaluate the effects of potential biases on the final estimates produced.

Results

Causes of Disease

Unknown agents accounted for 49% of all cases but only 23% of all visits to general practitioners, 3% of all hospitalizations, 2% of hospital occupancy, and 12% of all deaths (Table 1). Campylobacter spp. had the greatest effect on healthcare provision, according to all of the parameters examined. Nontyphoidal salmonellae and Clostridium perfringens caused most deaths. Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli O157:H7 together accounted for 15% of all deaths but <0.1% of all cases.

Disease Impact According to Food

Of the 1,724,315 estimated cases of indigenous foodborne disease in England and Wales, 67,157 (4%) were cases in which humans were considered to be the source of infection (foods contaminated by infected food handlers; Tables 2 and 3). Subtracting these cases left 1,657,158 cases in which contaminated food was the likely source. Within this subset, most illness was attributed to eating poultry (502,634, 30%), complex foods (453,237, 27%), and red meat (287,485, 17%). Only 76,623 (5%) patients were infected by eating plant-based foods, i.e., vegetables, fruit, and rice.

Chicken consumption accounted for more disease, deaths, and healthcare usage than any other food type. Milk also exerted a considerable impact on healthcare provision. No other single food type accounted for >8% for any of the healthcare use measures. In general, the healthcare impact arising from plant-based foods was low.

The lowest case-fatality rates were associated with plant-based foods. By contrast, foods of bovine origin tended to have the highest case-fatality rates. Shellfish had the lowest case-fatality rate of all of the foods of animal origin.

Illness and Risk

Analysis by food group (Table 4) shows that vegetables and fruit had the lowest disease and hospitalization risks and poultry had the highest. Red meat accounted for more illness than seafood but was associated with a lower risk for disease (24 cases/million servings compared with 41 cases/million servings).

The lowest disease risk for a single food type was for cooked vegetables, at 0.11 cases/million servings. This risk was used to calculate disease risk ratios for the other food types. Disease risk ratios ranged from 2 for fruit to 5,869 for shellfish. Within individual food groups, large variations in disease risk ratios occurred. A disease risk ratio was not calculated for the vegetable and fruit food group because cooked vegetables contribute to the overall risk for the group.

The lowest hospitalization risk for a single food type was for cooked vegetables, 0.45 hospitalizations/billion servings. This risk was used to calculate hospitalization risk ratios for the other food types. While salad vegetables had a disease risk ratio of 53, the hospitalization risk ratio was 229. Chicken had the highest hospitalization risk ratio, 5,595. This figure is >4 times the value estimated for turkey and more than double the estimate for shellfish, both of which had higher disease risk ratios than chicken.

[FIGURE OMITTED]

Discussion

To our knowledge, our study is the first to examine the impact of and risk for indigenous foodborne disease by food type. When all parameters were considered, infection due to chicken was consistently responsible for more disease, while disease linked to plant-based foods had a minor impact on the population.

Our methods build on approaches to estimate the impact of foodborne diseases in the United States (3) and England and Wales (4). To minimize bias, we avoided using assumptions whenever possible. We concluded that the effects of bias on the etiologic data (Table 1) were moderate (Table 5) because we were able to estimate the incidence of disease for each agent by taking national laboratory surveillance data and applying pathogen-specific multiplication factors that had been determined through a large population-based study (9). We were also able to use direct measurements from special studies and national surveillance systems to estimate the impact of foreign travel. We avoided using expert opinion (Table 5). Techniques such as Delphi (10) are available to assimilate the judgments of expert panels to produce consensus data. However, the Delphi estimate for the incidence of salmonellosis due to the consumption of products made from chicken and eggs (10) in the United Kingdom was >3 times the incidence for all salmonellosis calculated from a national population-based incidence study (9).

The use of data from published outbreak investigations also presents difficulties. Comparing outbreak surveillance data with those from published reports demonstrates a bias that favors the publication of novel findings and exceptional events (11). Therefore, we only used contemporary data drawn from locally based surveillance systems, population-based studies, and surveys (Table 5) (4) in these analyses. Nevertheless, certain reservations apply when using outbreak surveillance data to estimate the proportion of disease due to each food type for each pathogen. Ideally, a full account should be taken of the relative pathogen-specific contributions of each food type to both sporadic and outbreak-associated disease. However, determining the proportion of cases that fall into these 2 categories for any pathogen is problematic.

For sound epidemiologic reasons, case-control studies of sporadic disease test specific hypotheses that might explain disease transmission (12-15). Sample sizes are determined to detect associations for major risk factors. Population-attributable fractions are calculable for only a small number of foods for the small number of pathogens studied with these methods. Each study delivers a snapshot of the epidemiology of disease at a point in time for a particular population. While some of the findings from these studies are generalizable, population-attributable fractions for individual foods are not because food production patterns and consumer preferences change from country to country and with time (8,16,17). Corroborative evidence to support identified associations between disease and food consumption for studies of sporadic disease is usually lacking. However, in outbreak investigations, microbiologic findings, production records, and the like lend weight to the inferences drawn from analytic epidemiology (18-20). We believe that the true impact of outbreak-associated disease has likely been greatly underestimated (21,22).

Accounting for disease caused by intermittent or unpredictable food processing failures is important. For example, an estimated 224,000 people throughout the United States were infected with Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis after eating ice cream that had become contaminated as a result of a processing failure (20). However, outbreak cases were only formally recognized in Minnesota. The scale of the outbreak emerged because of an unusually detailed epidemiologic investigation. Therefore, under normal circumstances, most of those affected would have been classified as sporadic cases. This outbreak alone would have accounted for 17% of the 1.3 million cases of foodborne salmonellosis in the United States for 1994 (3). The 1996/7 FoodNet case-control study did not find an association between pasteurized ice cream and sporadic salmonellosis (12) because the study was not conducted during the narrow timeframe when the implicated product was on the market. This example is not isolated; milk-processing failures have resulted in hundreds of outbreak cases of Campylobacter and E. coli O157:H7 infections in the United Kingdom (18). While outbreaks of this type continue to be identified through routine surveillance, others likely go undetected. However, testing for associations between apparently sporadic disease and consumption of contaminated "pasteurized" milk using case-control studies is difficult for several reasons: study participants are unaware of the process history of the milk that they drink; pasteurized milk is very commonly drunk and identifying differences in exposure rates would involve extremely large sample sizes; and since the geographic and temporal distribution of cases would be expected to be heterogeneous, studies would have to extend over long periods and large areas. For these reasons, recent case-control studies of sporadic Campylobacter and E. coli O157:H7 infections in the United Kingdom failed to show associations between disease and consumption of milk (13,14,23). Similar arguments apply for the role of fruit juice or sprouts in the transmission of E. coli O157:H7 (24,25) or salad vegetables and Salmonella serotypes (26). While all of these foods have made considerable, if intermittent, contributions to the overall impact of disease in the population, their role in sporadic disease is hard to test and has seldom been demonstrated. Thus, published case-control studies of sporadic infection provide insufficient applicable data for our purposes.

By contrast, GSURV is large, comprehensive, and provides contemporary locally defined evidence-based data that takes into account the contribution of a much broader range of foods. For example, the foods most frequently associated with disease in published studies of sporadic Campylobacter infection (15,23), i.e., chicken, pork, red meat, and unpasteurized milk, also feature most prominently in GSURV, but GSURV also takes into account the more minor contributions of foods such as salad vegetables, fruit, and seafood. However, for certain pathogens the amount of outbreak data available is limited. The food distribution percentages for Campylobacter were based on 28 outbreaks (Online Appendix 2). Therefore, we have exercised considerable caution in interpreting these data and have identified this area as one in which the effects of bias on the final estimates are likely to be most profound (Table 5). Nevertheless, the results are also plausible. In our analyses, chicken emerges as the most important contributor to Campylobacter infection. This finding is consistent with data from food and veterinary studies (27,28), evaluations of the interventions enforced after the Belgian dioxin crisis (29), and observations on the relationships between human infection and poultry operations in Iceland (30). Our estimates for impact and risk for disease linked to shell eggs is consistent with a U.S. Department of Agriculture risk assessment on Salmonella Enteritidis in shell eggs and egg products (31). Therefore, after taking all of these factors into account, we concluded that GSURV was the most suitable source of pathogen-specific risk exposure data.

Our analyses were based on data drawn from 766 outbreaks in which a single vehicle of infection was identified. The 612 outbreaks that were reported as foodborne but had no identified vehicle of infection were excluded from analysis. In effect, we have made the tacit assumption that distribution of foods in the subset of outbreaks in which a vehicle was identified is representative of the complete population of outbreaks. However, certain vehicles may be more likely to be implicated in outbreak investigations than others. This situation might occur if investigators tend to preferentially collect data on the types of food that are perceived as high risk or when laboratory methods vary in sensitivity according to food type. Therefore, a systematic vehicle detection bias could potentially result in our analyses underestimating the contribution and risks attributable to those foods that were rarely implicated in outbreak investigations, e.g., salad items such as sprouts, which are now being recognized as potential sources of infection (25), fruit, or background ingredients such as herbs and spices.

Eggs are used as an ingredient in a wide range of foods such as desserts, sauces, and savories (complex foods). These dishes always include other ingredients so ascribing disease-causing ingredients in the complex foods category is difficult. There are inherent difficulties in demonstrating epidemiologic association beyond the level of vehicle of infection to that of source. However, several factors (being seen by a general practitioner, hospitalization, and case-fatality rates) linked to complex foods are similar to those for eggs. Also, [approximately equal to] 70% of the complex foods associated with illness included eggs as an ingredient. Therefore, we suggest that eggs are probably a major source of infection for disease related to complex foods.

Eating shellfish was associated with the highest disease risk. Shellfish tends to be a luxury food, and consumption levels were low when compared with those of other food types. Although the number of cases attributed to shellfish was of the same order as beef or eggs, the level of risk was much higher. Preharvesting contamination of oysters with norovirus had a major impact in generating cases of disease. This finding presents an additional impact to that arising from the cross-contamination with Salmonella of ready-to-eat items such as cocktail shrimp (32).

When severity of illness data are taken into consideration, an elevated risk is associated with eating chicken. Chicken has a lower disease risk ratio than either shellfish or turkey but has a higher hospitalization risk ratio. This finding is explained by the relative prominence of Campylobacter and nontyphoidal salmonellae in illness attributable to chicken. Infection with these pathogens is much more likely to result in hospitalization than disease due to norovirus, which accounts for much shellfish-associated illness, or C. perfringens, one of the more common turkey-associated infections.

Risks associated with eating vegetables were generally low. However, risks associated with cooked vegetables were much lower than those associated with salad vegetables. This finding is mainly because cooking would normally eliminate the pathogens that can contaminate vegetables in the field, the processing plant, the market, or the kitchen through cross-contamination. However, no parallel control process exists for salad vegetables, which are generally regarded as ready to eat.

While these analyses provide data on the impact of disease attributable to different food types, considerable heterogeneity exists in the origin, production, and handling of each of these types of food. Further research is needed to examine the influence of imported foods, organic production, factory farming, and commercial catering.

We have also attempted to define the contribution of foods by infected food handlers. One of the key reasons for conducting these analyses was to provide an evidence base for developing disease control strategies. Controlling transmission of infection from infected food handlers in commercial and domestic catering requires different strategies than controlling foodborne zoonoses through the food chain. The pathogen most frequently transmitted by infected food handlers was norovirus. Given the ubiquity of norovirus infection (9,33), its extreme infectivity, and the sudden and violent onset of symptoms (34), control of transmission is difficult and more focused strategies are needed.

Our evidence-based analyses demonstrate that the most important priority in reducing the impact of indigenous foodborne disease in England and Wales is controlling infection from contaminated chicken. Chicken was associated with relatively high levels of risk and accounted for more disease, health service usage, and death than any other individual food type. Interventions introduced during the mid-1990s to control S. Enteritidis in the Great Britain chicken flock (35) appear to have been successful in reducing the burden of salmonellosis in England and Wales (4). These findings are consistent with analyses from Sweden (36), Denmark (37), and the United States (38), which together demonstrate that foodborne salmonellosis can be substantially reduced by implementing targeted initiatives to control Salmonella in domestic livestock.

The greatest challenge to protect the population from foodborne infection is to develop effective programs to control Campylobacter through the chicken production chain. This intervention is possible, as witnessed in Iceland, where measures at retail level and in the household were introduced to prevent Campylobacter transmission. Parallel declines (>70%) were subsequently observed in the carriage of Campylobacter in broiler flocks and in human infections (29). Finally, the data from Europe and the United States show that the largest benefits in reducing Salmonella and Campylobacter levels have come from implementing controls in farm-to-retail processing rather than in instituting them in domestic kitchens, where the estimated impacts are much smaller in scale (39), although still important.

Table 1. Estimated annual impact of indigenous foodborne disease by
etiologic agent, England and Wales

                                                    General
Pathogen                            Cases      practitioner cases

Bacteria
  Aeromonas spp.                          0               0
  Bacillus spp.                      10,717           4,287
  Campylobacter spp.                337,655         160,788
  Clostridium perfringens           168,436          88,651
  C. difficile cytotoxin                  0               0
  Escherichia coli O157: H7           1,026           1,026
  Non-O157: H7 STEC *                   114             114
  Other E. coli                      62,050          13,850
  Listeria monocytogenes                221             221
  Nontyphoidal salmonellae           73,193          52,280
  Salmonella Typhi                       86              86
  S. Paratyphi                           91              91
  Shigella spp.                         308             308
  Staphylococcus aureus               9,196           3,678
  Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139             0               0
  V. cholerae, other serotypes          194              97
  Other vibrio species                  291             146
  Yersinia spp.                     129,338          11,054
Parasites
  Cryptosporidium parvum              1,699             894
  Cyclospora cayatenensis             1,026             540
  Giardia lamblia                     1,999           1,052
Viruses
  Adenovirus 40/41                        0               0
  Astrovirus                         17,741           4,032
  Norovirus                          61,584           9,775
  Rotavirus                           8,205           1,368
  Sapovirus                               0               0
Unknown                             839,144         106,221
Total ([dagger])                  1,724,315         460,560

                                           Hospital

Pathogen                          Cases     Days       Deaths

Bacteria
  Aeromonas spp.                       0          0       0
  Bacillus spp.                       26         67       0
  Campylobacter spp.              15,918     58,897      80
  Clostridium perfringens            709     10,496     177
  C. difficile cytotoxin               0          0       0
  Escherichia coli O157: H7          389      2,216      23
  Non-O157: H7 STEC *                 43        246       3
  Other E. coli                      319      1,561       6
  Listeria monocytogenes             221      3,959      78
  Nontyphoidal salmonellae         2,666     15,465     209
  Salmonella Typhi                    35        239       0
  S. Paratyphi                        29        181       0
  Shigella spp.                        7         37       0
  Staphylococcus aureus              232        278       0
  Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139          0          0       0
  V. cholerae, other serotypes         8         30       0
  Other vibrio species                 4         16       2
  Yersinia spp.                      619      5,448       3
Parasites
  Cryptosporidium parvum              32        119       3
  Cyclospora cayatenensis              3         10       0
  Giardia lamblia                      6         22       0
Viruses
  Adenovirus 40/41                     0          0       0
  Astrovirus                          12         47       4
  Norovirus                           39        152      10
  Rotavirus                           42        110       4
  Sapovirus                            0          0       0
Unknown                              637      1,785      85
Total ([dagger])                  21,997    101,382     687

* STEC, Shiga toxin--producing Escherichia coli.

([dagger]) Totals are calculated on the basis of rounding to whole
numbers.

Table 2. Estimated annual impact of indigenous foodborne disease, by
food group and type, England and Wales

                                                         Case-fatality
Food group/type            Cases (%)       Deaths (%)       rate *

Poultry                    502,634 (29)     191 (28)          38
  Chicken                  398,420 (23)     141 (21)          35
  Turkey                    87,798 (5)       45 (7)           52
  Mixed/unspecified         16,416 (1)        4 (1)           27
Eggs                       103,740 (6)       46 (7)           44
Red meat                   287,485 (17)     164 (24)          57
  Beef                     115,929 (7)       67 (10)          58
  Pork                      46,539 (3)       24 (4)           53
  Bacon/ham                 17,450 (1)        9 (1)           53
  Lamb                      46,239 (3)       27 (4)           59
  Mixed/unspecified         61,329 (4)       36 (5)           59
Seafood                    116,603 (7)       30 (4)           26
  Fish                      22,311 (1)       10 (2)           47
  Shellfish                 77,019 (4)       16 (2)           21
  Mixed/unspecified         17,273 (1)        4 (1)           24
Milk                       108,043 (6)       37 (5)           34
Other dairy products         8,794 (0)        5 (0)           55
Vegetable/fruit             49,642 (3)       14 (2)           29
  Salad vegetables          37,496 (2)       11 (2)           28
  Cooked vegetables          6,870 (0)        2 (0)           35
  Fruit                      5,275 (0)        1 (0)           25
Rice                        26,981 (2)        5 (1)           20
Complex foods              453,237 (26)     181 (26)          40
Infected food handler       67,157 (4)       14 (2)           20
Total ([dagger])         1,724,315          687               40

* Deaths/100,000 cases.

([dagger]) Totals given are calculated on the basis of rounding to whole
numbers.

Table 3. Estimated annual healthcare impact of indigenous foodborne
disease, by food group and type England and Wales

                                General
Food group/type          practitioner cases (%)    Hospital cases (%)

Poultry                       159,433 (35)              9,952 (45)
  Chicken                     129,271 (28)              9,005 (41)
  Turkey                       23,679 (5)                 360 (2)
  Mixed/unspecified             6,483 (1)                 587 (3)
Eggs                           19,554 (4)                 552 (3)
Red meat                       80,805 (18)              1,231 (6)
  Beef                         34,981 (8)                 429 (2)
  Pork                         11,923 (3)                 219 (1)
  Bacon/ham                     4,470 (0)                  82 (0)
  Lamb                         14,283 (3)                 157 (1)
  Mixed/unspecified            15,148 (3)                 343 (2)
Seafood                        23,998 (5)                 828 (4)
  Fish                          4,603 (1)                 112 (1)
  Shellfish                    12,861 (3)                 134 (1)
  Mixed/unspecified             6,534 (1)                 582 (3)
Milk                           40,755 (9)               3,681 (17)
Other dairy products            1,561 (0)                  67 (0)
Vegetable/fruit                11,912 (3)                 702 (3)
  Salad vegetables              9,874 (2)                 660 (3)
  Cooked vegetables             1,184 (0)                  27 (0)
  Fruit                           853 (0)                  15 (0)
Rice                            5,127 (1)                  73 (0)
Complex foods                 103,409 (22)              4,175 (19)
Infected food handler          14,007 (3)                 736 (3)
Total *                       460,560                  21,997

Food group/type          Hospital days (%)

Poultry                     41,645 (41)
  Chicken                   36,425 (36)
  Turkey                     3,001 (3)
  Mixed/unspecified          2,219 (2)
Eggs                         3,410 (3)
Red meat                    10,935 (11)
  Beef                       4,284 (4)
  Pork                       1,685 (2)
  Bacon/ham                    632 (0)
  Lamb                       1,721 (2)
  Mixed/unspecified          2,613 (3)
Seafood                      3,690 (4)
  Fish                        748  (1)
  Shellfish                   752  (1)
  Mixed/unspecified          2,190 (2)
Milk                        14,176 (14)
Other dairy products           402 (0)
Vegetable/fruit              2,932 (3)
  Salad vegetables           2,671 (3)
  Cooked vegetables            168 (0)
  Fruit                         93 (0)
Rice                           432 (0)
Complex foods               20,646 (20)
Infected food handler        3,113 (3)
Total *                    101,382

* Totals given are calculated on the basis of rounding whole numbers.

Table 4. Estimated risks associated with food groups and types, England
and Wales

Food group/type                 Disease risk *             Risk ratio

Poultry                               104                      947
  Chicken                             111                    1,013
  Turkey                              157                    1,429
  Mixed/unspecified                    24                      217
Eggs                                   49                      448
Red meat                               24                      217
  Beef                                 41                      375
  Pork                                 20                      180
  Bacon/ham                             8                       75
  Lamb                                 38                      343
  Mixed/unspecified                    17                      157
Seafood                                41                      374
  Fish                                  8                       75
  Shellfish                           646                    5,869
  Mixed/unspecified          NA ([double dagger])              NA
Milk                                    4                       35
Other dairy products                    2                       17
Vegetable/fruit                         1                      NA
  Salad vegetables                      6                       53
  Cooked vegetables                     0                       1
  Fruit                                 0                       2
Rice                                   11                      101

Food group/type         Hospitalization risk ([dagger])    Risk ratio

Poultry                              2,063                   4,584
  Chicken                            2,518                   5,595
  Turkey                               645                   1,433
  Mixed/unspecified                    852                   1,893
Eggs                                   262                     583
Red meat                               102                     227
  Beef                                 153                     339
  Pork                                  93                     208
  Bacon/ham                             39                      86
  Lamb                                 128                     285
  Mixed/unspecified                     96                     214
Seafood                                293                     650
  Fish                                  41                      92
  Shellfish                          1,121                   2,490
  Mixed/unspecified                   NA                       NA
Milk                                   133                     295
Other dairy products                    14                      32
Vegetable/fruit                          8                      NA
  Salad vegetables                     103                     229
  Cooked vegetables                      0                       1
  Fruit                                  1                       1
Rice                                    30                      67

* Cases/1 million servings.

([dagger]) Hospitalizations/1 billion servings.

([double dagger]]) NA, not applicable.

Table 5. Quality of evidence

Stage                       Data sources               Evidence

All infectious           Population studies            Measured
intestinal disease
Etiology                 Population studies       Measured for most;
                                                   inferred rarely
Indigenous              National laboratory            Measured
infection               report surveillance;
                          special studies
Foodborne                National outbreak        Measured for most;
transmission           surveillance (GSURV) *      inferred rarely
Food attribution               GSURV                   Measured
Presentations to         Population studies            Measured
primary care
Hospitalizations       GSURV; special studies          Measured
Hospital occupancy        Hospital episode             Measured
                             statistics
Deaths                         GSURV                   Measured
Food specific risks     National food survey           Measured

                                                 Potential effects of
                                                    bias on final
Stage                  Principal assumptions          estimates

All infectious         Representivity of data          Moderate
intestinal disease
Etiology               Accuracy and sensiti-           Moderate
                         vity of diagnostic
                              methods
Indigenous             Completeness of repor-         Negligible
infection                       ting

Foodborne              Representivity of data           Major
transmission
Food attribution       Representivity of data           Major
Presentations to       Representivity of data          Moderate
primary care
Hospitalizations       Representivity of data          Moderate
Hospital occupancy     Representivity of data          Moderate

Deaths                 Representivity of data         Negligible
Food specific risks    Representivity of data           Major

* GSURV, National Surveillance Database for General Outbreaks of
Infectious Intestinal Disease.

Acknowledgments

We thank the microbiologists; public health physicians; infection control nurses; environmental health officers; general practitioners; Royal College of General Practitioners; staff of the Health Protection Agency, National Public Health Service for Wales and National Health Service laboratories; and all members of the Environmental and Enteric Diseases Department of the Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, without whose work the surveillance schemes would not function.

No financial support was received from organizations other than the Health Protection Agency. None of the authors has any financial interest in the subject matter disclosed in this manuscript, nor are there any conflicts of interest.

References

(1.) World Health Organization. WHO global strategy for food safety: safer food for better health. Geneva: The Organization; 2002.

(2.) Kosek M, Bern C, Guerrant RL. The global burden of disease, as estimated from studies published between 1992 and 2000. Bull World Health Organ. 2003;81:197-203.

(3.) Mead PS, Slutsker L, Dietz V, McCaig LF, Bresee JS, Shapiro C, et al. Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 1999;5:607-25.

(4.) Adak GK, Long SM, O'Brien SJ. Trends in indigenous foodborne disease and deaths, England and Wales: 1992 to 2000. Gut. 2002;51:832-41.

(5.) Black RE, Brown KH, Becker S. Effects of diarrhea associated with specific enteropathogens on the growth of children in rural Bangladesh. Pediatrics. 1984;73:799-805.

(6.) Guerrant DI, Moore SR, Lima AAM, Patrick P, Schorling JB, Guerrant RL. Association of early childhood diarrhea and cryptosporidiosis with impaired fitness and cognitive function four-seven years later in a poor urban community in Northeast Brazil. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1999;61:707-13.

(7.) Wall PG, de Louvois J, Gilbert R J, Rowe B. Food poisoning: notifications, laboratory reports, and outbreaks--where do the statistics come from and what do they mean? Commun Dis Rep CDR Review. 1996;6:R93 100.

(8.) Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs and National Statistics. National Food Survey 2000-Annual report on food expenditure, consumption and nutrient intakes. London: The Stationery Office; 2001.

(9.) Infectious Intestinal Disease Study Team. A report of the study of infectious intestinal disease in England. London: The Stationery Office; 2000.

(10.) Hanson S. Estimating the incidence of food-borne Salmonella and the effectiveness of alternative control measures using the Delphi method. Int J Food Microbiol. 1997;35:195-204.

(11.) O'Brien SJ, Gillespie IA, Sivanesan M, Adak GK. Examining publication bias in foodborne outbreak investigations: implications for food safety policy. Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases. Atlanta, Georgia, March 2002. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2002. Abstract no. 73.

(12.) Kimura AC, Reddy S, Marcus R, Cieslak PR, Mohle-Boetani JC, Kassenborg HD, et al. Chicken is a newly identified risk factor for sporadic Salmonella serotype Enteritidis infections in the United States: a case-control study in FoodNet sites. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:$244-52.

(13.) Parry SM, Salmon RL, Willshaw GA, Cheasty T. Risk factors for and prevention of sporadic infections with Vero cytotoxin (Shiga toxin) producing Escherichia coli O157. Lancet. 1998;351:1019-22.

(14.) O'Brien S J, Adak GK, Gilham C. Contact with the fanning environment as a major risk factor for sporadic cases of Shiga toxin (Vero cytotoxin)-producing Eseherichia coli O157 infection in humans. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:1049-51.

(15.) Neimann J, Engberg J, Molbak K, Wegener H. A case-control study of risk factors for sporadic campylobacter infections in Denmark. Epidemiol Infect. 2003;130:353-66.

(16.) Buzby JC, Roberts T. Economic costs and trade impacts of microbial foodborne illness. World Health Stat Q. 1997;50:57-57.

(17.) Hedberg CW, MacDonald KL, Osterholm MT. Changing epidemiology of food-borne disease: a Minnesota perspective. Clin Infect Dis. 1994;18:671-82.

(18.) Gillespie IA, Adak GK, O'Brien SJ, Bolton FJ. Milkborne general outbreaks of infectious intestinal disease, England and Wales, 1992-2000. Epidemiol Infect. 2003;130:461 8.

(19.) Bell BP, Goldoft M, Griffin PM, Davis MA, Gordon DC, Tarr PI, et al. A multistate outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7-associated bloody diarrhea and hemolytic uremic syndrome from hamburgers--the Washington experience. JAMA. 1994;272:1349-53.

(20.) Hennessy TW, Hedberg CW, Slutsker L, White KE, Besser-Wiek JM, Moen ME, et al. A national outbreak of Salmonella enteritidis infections from ice cream. N En[micro]L J Med. 1996;334:1281-5.

(21.) Swaminathan B, Barrett TJ, Hunter SB, Tauxe RV, CDC PulseNet Task Force. PulseNet: the molecular subtyping network for foodborne bacterial disease surveillance, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:382-9.

(22.) Gillespie IA, O'Brien S J, Adak GK, Tam CC, Frost JA, Bolton F J, et al. Point source outbreaks of Campylobacter jejuni infection--are they more common than we think and what might cause them? Epidemiol Infect. 2003;130:367-75.

(23.) Rodrigues LC, Cowden JM, Wheeler JG, Sethi D, Wall PG, Cumberland P. The study of infectious intestinal disease in England: risk factors for cases of infectious intestinal disease with Campylobacter jejuni infection. Epidemiol Infect. 2001;127:185-93.

(24.) Cody SH, Glynn K, Farrar JA, Cairns KL, Griffin PM, Kobayashi J, et al. An outbreak of Eseherichia coli O157:H7 infection from unpasteurized commercial apple juice. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:202-9.

(25.) Breuer T, Benkel DH, Shapiro RL, Hall WN, Winnett MM, Linn M J, et al. A multistate outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 infections linked to alfalfa sprouts grown from contaminated seeds. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:977-82.

(26.) Horby P, O'Brien SJ, Adak GK, Graham C, Hawker J, Hunter P, et al. A national outbreak of multi-resistant Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium definitive phage type (DT) 104 associated with consumption of lettuce. Epidemiol Infect. 2003;130:169-78.

(27.) Jorgensen F, Bailey R, Williams S, Henderson P, Wareing DRA, Bolton FJ, et al. Prevalence and numbers of Salmonella and Campylobacter spp on raw, whole chickens in relation to sampling methods. Int J Food Microbiol. 2002;76:151-64.

(28.) Newell DG, Shreeve JE, Toszeghy M, Domingue G, Bull S, Humphrey T, et al. Changes in the carriage of Campylobacter strains by poultry carcasses during processing in abattoirs. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67:2636-40.

(29.) Vellinga A, Van Loock F. The dioxin crisis as experiment to determine poultry-related Campylobacter enteritis. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002;8:19-22.

(30.) Stern N J, Hiett KL, Alfredsson GA, Kristinsson KG, Reirsen J, Hardardottir H, et al. Campylobacter spp. in Icelandic poultry operations and human disease. Epidemiol Infect. 2003;130:23 32.

(31.) Hope BK, Baker AR, Edel ED, Hogue AT, Schlosser WD, Whiting R, et al. An overview of the Salmonella Enteritidis risk assessment for shell eggs and egg products. Risk Anal. 2002;22:203-17.

(32.) Gillespie IA, Adak GK, O'Brien SJ, Brett MM, Bolton FJ. General outbreaks of infectious intestinal disease associates with fish and shellfish, England and Wales, 1992 1999. Commun Dis Public Health. 2001;4:117-23.

(33.) de Wit MAS, Koopmans MPG, Kortbeek LM, Wannet WJ, Vinje J, van Leusden F, et al. Sensor, a population-based cohort study on gastroenteritis in the Netherlands: incidence and etiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154:666-74.

(34.) Caul EO. Viral gastroenteritis: small round structured viruses, caliciviruses and astroviruses. Part 1. The clinical and diagnostic perspective. J Clin Pathol. 1996;49:874-80.

(35.) Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. Second report on salmonella in eggs. London: The Stationery Office; 2001.

(36.) Engvall A, Andersson Y. Control of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis in Sweden. In Saeed AM, editor. Salmonella enterica Serovar Enteritidis in humans and animals. Epidemiology, pathogenesis and control. Ames: Iowa State University Press; 1999. p. 291-305.

(37.) Wegener HC, Hald T, Wong DL, Madsen M, Korsgaard H, Berger F, et al. Salmonella control programs in Denmark. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9:774-80.

(38.) Patrick ME, Adcock PM, Gomez TM, Altekruse SF, Holland BH, Tauxe RV, et al. Salmonella Enteritidis infections, United States, 1985-1999. Emerg Infect Dis 2004;10:1-7.

(39.) Duff SB, Scott EA, Mafilios MS, Todd EC, Krilov LR, Geddes AM. Cost-effectiveness of a targetted disinfection program in household kitchens to prevent foodborne illnesses in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. J Food Prot. 2003;66:2103-15.

Dr. Adak is head of the Environmental and Enteric Diseases Department of the Health Protection Agency Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre in London, UK. He has specialized in the epidemiology of gastrointestinal diseases and has been responsible for managing and developing disease surveillance systems and research projects since 1989.

Address for correspondence: G.K. Adak, Environmental and Enteric Diseases Department, Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, Health Protection Agency Centre for Infections, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, United Kingdom; fax: [phone]; email: [e-mail]

Goutam K. Adak, * Sallyanne M. Meakins, * Hopi Yip, * Benjamin A. Lopman, * and Sarah J. O'Brien *

* Health Protection Agency Centre for Infections, London, United Kingdom