June 10, 2013

Guideline Title

Guidelines for the public health management of typhoid and paratyphoid in England. Practice guidelines from the National Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group.

Bibliographic Source(s)

Balasegaram S, Potter AL, Grynszpan D, Barlow S, Behrens RH, Lighton L, Booth L, Inamdar L, Neal K, Nye K, Lawrence J, Jones J, Gray I, Tolley D, Lane C, Adak B, Cummins A, Addiman S, Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group, Health Protection Agency. Guidelines for the public health management of typhoid and paratyphoid in England: practice guidelines from the National Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group. J Infect. 2012 Sep;65(3):197-213. [59 references] PubMed External Web Site Policy

Guideline Status

This is the current release of the guideline.

Guidelines for the public health management of typh... [J Infect. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

2012 Sep;65(3):197-213. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2012.05.005. Epub 2012 May 23.

Guidelines for the public health management of typhoid and paratyphoid in England: practice guidelines from the National Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group.

Balasegaram S, Potter AL, Grynszpan D, Barlow S, Behrens RH, Lighton L, Booth L, Inamdar L, Neal K, Nye K, Lawrence J, Jones J, Gray I, Tolley D, Lane C, Adak B, Cummins A, Addiman S; Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group, Health Protection Agency, London, England.

Source

South East Regional Epidemiology Unit, Health Protection Agency, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9SZ, UK. sooria.balasegaram@hpa.org.uk

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

The Typhoid and Paratyphoid Reference Group (TPRG) was convened by the Health Protection Agency (HPA) and the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) to revise guidelines for public health management of enteric fever. This paper presents the new guidelines for England and their rationale.

METHODS:

Methods include literature reviews including grey literature such as audit data and case studies; analysis of enhanced surveillance data from England, Wales and Northern Ireland; review of clearance and screening schedules in use in other non-endemic areas; and expert consensus.

RESULTS:

The evidence and principles underpinning the new guidance are summarised. Significant changes from previous guidance include: • Algorithms to guide risk assessment and management, based on risk group and travel history; • Outline of investigation of non-travel cases; • Simplified microbiological clearance schedules for cases and contacts; • Targeted co-traveller screening and a "warn and inform" approach for contacts; • Management of convalescent and chronic carriers.

CONCLUSIONS:

The guidelines were launched in February 2012. Feedback has been positive: the guidelines are reported to be clear, systematic, practical and risk-based. An evaluation of the guidelines is outlined and will add to the evidence base. There is potential for simplification and consistency between international guidelines.
Copyright © 2012 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.