Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T16:11:39.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The social and economic impact of salmonellosis: A report of a national survey in England and Wales of laboratory-confirmed salmonella infections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

P. N. Sockett  and
J. A. Roberts
P. N. Sockett
Affiliation:
Public Health Laboratory Service, Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ
J. A. Roberts
Affiliation:
Health Services Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This study presents the findings of a national survey of 1482 cases of salmonellosis reported to Environmental Health Departments in England and Wales between August 1988 and March 1989. A questionnaire survey of ill individuals and the environmental health officers who investigated them sought information about costs which were imposed upon public health authorities, the health sector, individuals and their families and the costs to the wider economy in terms of lost production.

Costs of £996339 were identified. Over half (£507555) resulted from lost production due to sickness absence and more than a third (£392822) were costs to the public sector which resulted from health care and local authority investigation of cases. The remaining costs (£95962), although the smallest proportion of the total, indicated that salmonellosis can have a significant impact on affected individuals and their families.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 107 , Issue 2 , October 1991 , pp. 335 - 347
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

References

REFERENCES

1.Calkins, GN. Some results of sanitary legislation in England since 1875. Publ Am Stat Assoc 1891: 297–303.Google Scholar
2.Galbraith, NS, Barrett, NJ, Sockett, PN. The changing pattern of foodborne disease in England and Wales. Public Health 1987; 101: 319–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Galbraith, NS. The epidemiology of foodborne disease in England and Wales in the 1980's. Outlook Agricult 1990; 19: 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Manning, EL. Danger lurks in your supermarket meat cases. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1988; 192: 414–97.Google Scholar
5.Todd, ECD. Economic loss from foodborne disease outbreaks associated with food service establishments. J Food Protect 1985; 48: 169–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Mann, JD, Lathrop, GD, Bannerman, JA. Economic impact of a botulism outbreak. JAMA 1983; 249: 1299–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Roberts, JA. The national health service in the UK: from myths to markets. Health Policy Planning 1989; 4: 62–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Roberts, JA, Sockett, PN, Gill, ON. Economic impact of a nationwide outbreak of salmonellosis: cost-benefit of early intervention. BMJ 1989; 298: 1277–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Levy, BS. The economic impact of a foodborne salmonellosis outbreak. JAMA 1974; 230: 1281–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Cohen, DR, Porter, IA, Reid, TMS, Sharp, JCM, Forbes, GI, Paterson, GM. A cost benefit study of milkborne salmonellosis. J Hyg 1983; 91: 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Yule, BF, Forbes, GI, Macleod, AF, Sharp, JCM. The costs and benefits of preventing poultryborne salmonellosis in Scotland by irradiation. Aberdeen: Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen. 1986. (Discussion paper 05/86.)Google Scholar
12.Krug, W, Rehm, N. Nutzen-kosten-analyse der Salmonellose bekampfung. Schriftenreihe des Bundesministers für Jugend, Familie und Gesundheit. Stuttgart: W Kohlhammer. 1983.Google Scholar
13.Curtin, L. Economic study of salmonella poisoning and control measures in Canada. Working paper 11/84. Food Markets Analysis Division. Marketing and Economics Branch. Agriculture Canada, 1984.Google Scholar
14.Sockett, PN, Stanwell-Smith, R. Cost analysis of the use of health-care services by sporadic cases and family outbreaks of Salmonella typhimurium and Campylobacter infection.In: Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on foodborne infections and intoxications.Berlin:WHO 2: 1036–9.Google Scholar
15.Roberts, JA, Sockett, PN, Gill, ON. Costs benefit analysis of controlling a national outbreak of Salmonella napoli: exploring a method. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Health Services Research Unit, 1990.Google Scholar
16.National ambulance service survey 1988–89. District Finance Department, York Health Authority, 1990.Google Scholar
17.Archer, DL. Diarrhoeal episodes and diarrhoeal disease: acute disease with chronic implications. J Food Project 1984; 47: 322–8.Google ScholarPubMed
18.Todd, ECD. Economic loss resulting from microbial contamination of food. In: Proceedings of the second national conference for food protection. Washington DC: US Food and Drug Administration, 1984; 151–66.Google Scholar
19.Sockett, PN, Roberts, JA. Social and economic implications of foodborne infection. In: Goldring, O. ed. Salmonella and listeria, implications for food safety. EAG Scientific Ltd. 1989: 185–209.Google Scholar
20.Todd, ECD. Economic loss from foodborne disease and non-illness related recalls because of mishandling by food processors. J Food Protect; 48: 621–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Todd, E. Epidemiology of foodborne illness: North Africa. Lancet 1990; 336: 788–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Gerigk, K. Foodborne disease in Europe: present situation and future developments of the WHO surveillance programme.2nd UNDP Steering Committee Meeting on Food Safety ICP/FOS 029/6.Budapest:WHO. 1990.Google Scholar