Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 27, Number 1—January 2021
Dispatch

Optimization of Notification Criteria for Shiga Toxin–Producing Escherichia coli Surveillance, the Netherlands

Ingrid H.M. FriesemaComments to Author , Sjoerd Kuiling, Zsofia Igloi, and Eelco Franz
Author affiliations: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands (I.H.M. Friesema, S. Kuiling, Z. Igloi, E. Franz); European Program for Public Health Microbiology Training, Stockholm, Sweden (Z. Igloi)

Main Article

Table 1

Most prevalent serotypes in non-O157 Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli, the Netherlands, July 2007–June 2016 and July 2016–December 2019

Most prevalent
 July 2007–June 2016, n = 1,370
July 2016–December 2019, n = 299
Serotype
 No. (%)
 Serotype
 No. (%)
1 O26 171 (12) O26 80 (27)
2 O91 137 (10) O103 31 (10)
3 O146 89 (6) O63 18 (6)
4 O103 87 (6) O146 16 (5)
5
 O63
 54 (6)
O145
 13 (4)
*Non-O157 includes O nontypeable serotypes. Because O nontypeable is a diffuse group, we left it out of the list of most prevalent serotypes. However, during July 2007–June 2016, 118/1,370 (9%) serotypes were O nontypeable; during July 2016–December 2019, 11/299 (4%) were O nontypeable.

Main Article

Page created: November 23, 2020
Page updated: December 21, 2020
Page reviewed: December 21, 2020
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external