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 8, Number 9—September 2002
Research

A Case-Case Comparison of Campylobacter coli and Campylobacter jejuni Infection: A Tool for Generating Hypotheses

Iain Gillespie*, Sarah J. O’Brien*Comments to Author , Jennifer A. Frost†, Goutam K. Adak*, Le Hong Phong*, Anthony V. Swan‡, Michael J. Painter§, Keith R. Neal¶, and the Campylobacter Sentinel Surveillance System Collaborators 1
Author affiliations: *Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS) Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London, United Kingdom; †PHLS Laboratory of Enteric Pathogens, London, United Kingdom; ‡PHLS Statistics Unit, London, United Kingdom; §Manchester Health Authority, Manchester, United Kingdom; ¶University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom;

Main Article

Table 1

Demographics, clinical symptoms, and severity of infections with Campylobacter coli and C. jejuni

Variable Campylobacter species (%)
 χ2 p value
C. coli (n=272) C. jejuni (n=3,489)
Mean age 42.9 38.5 - 0.001
Male 123 (45) 1,734 (50) 2.02 0.16
Female 149 (55) 1,755 (50)
Mean length of illness 11.4 11.3 - 0.92
Diarrhea Yes 253 (96) 3,355 (98) 3.11 0.08
No 10 (4) 73 (2)
Bloody stools Yes 73 (35) 964 (34) 0.07 0.79
No 134 (65) 1843 (66)
Vomiting Yes 87 (37) 1249 (40) 1.00 0.32
No 151 (63) 1885 (60)
Abdominal pain Yes 236 (93) 3,013 (92) 0.13 0.72
No 19 (7) 265 (8)
Fever Yes 206 (84) 2,812 (86) 1.44 0.23
No 40 (16) 440 (14)
Seeking advice from a doctor Yes 260 (97) 3,345 (98) 0.65 0.42
No 8 (3) 76 (2)
Hospitalized Yes 23 (9) 358 (10) 0.97 0.32
No 245 (91) 3,055 (90)
Mean days off work/normal activities 6.7 7.6 - 0.05

Main Article

1The Campylobacter Sentinel Surveillance System Collaborators comprise public health, environmental health, and laboratory staff who serve the populations of the following health authorities in England and Wales: Birmingham, Bradford, Bro Taf, Bury and Rochdale, Dyfed Powys, East Kent, Enfield & Haringey, Herefordshire, Leeds, Leicestershire; Manchester, North Cumbria, North Essex, North West Lancashire; Nottingham, Salford and Trafford, South and West Devon (part), South Lancashire, Southampton and South West Hampshire, Stockport, West Pennine, and Wigan and Bolton with the PHLS Laboratory of Enteric Pathogens, the PHLS Statistic Unit and the PHLS Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre.

Page created: July 16, 2010
Page updated: July 16, 2010
Page reviewed: July 16, 2010
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