-
A seroepidemiological study of rubella on female employees in an university hospital by ELISA method
-
Yeo Jin Chung, Joung Soon Kim
-
Korean J Epidemiol. 1989;11(1):107-114.
-
-
-
 Abstract
 PDF
-
Abstract
This study was carried out in 1988 on 435 randomly sampled females out of 1,728 female workers in an university hospital in order to obtain herd immunity level and its epidemiological characteristics.
The presence of rubella antibody was checked by ELISA method(Rubazyme Diagnostic Kit-Ab-bott Laboratory) with the sera collected during periodic medical examination in 1987. Also Self-recorded questionnaire survey on demographic characteristics, history of vaccination and natural infection of rubella, and knowledge on relationship between the rubella infection during pregnancy and congenital malformation of the baby.
The results obtained are summarized as followings:
1. The overall positive rate or rubella antibody detected by ELISA kit was 78.2%; there was no statistically significant differences of rubella antibody positive rate between age groups, duration of employment and specialty departments.
The positive rate was significantly different, however, between professions, i.e., laboratory technicians showed the highest positive rate(93.3%) but pharmacists and dietician’s positive rate revealed the lowest(58.3%), which suggested the antibody positive rate was associated with the degree of exposure to the rubella virus.
2. On the question about the past history of natural infection and immunization of rubella, over one-half of the respodents checked on “status unknown”, and only 8.5% of them admitted having the history of infection and vaccination. Nevertheless there was no demonstrable association between the past history and the rubella antibody status, presence or absence.
3. On the question about knowledge concerning clinical characteristics, mode of transmission of rubella virus and association between rubella infection and fetal malformation, only 69% of the respondents acknowledged and it showed statistical difference between professions. The major source of information was formal education in professional schools.
(This study was supported by Public Health Research Foundation)
-
Summary
|
KSE
