Routine screening of harmful microorganisms in beach sands: implications to public health

Beaches worldwide provide recreational opportunities to hundreds of millions of people and serve as important components of coastal economies. Beach water is often monitored for microbiological quality to detect the presence of indicators of human sewage contamination so as to prevent public health outbreaks associated with water contact. However, growing evidence suggests that beach sand can harbor microbes harmful to human health, often in concentrations greater than the beach water. Currently, there are no standards for monitoring, sampling, analyzing, or managing beach sand quality. In addition to indicator microbes, growing evidence has identified pathogenic bacteria, viruses, and fungi in a variety of beach sands worldwide. The public health threat associated with these populations through direct and indirect contact is unknown because so little research has been conducted relating to health outcomes associated with sand quality. In this manuscript, we present the consensus findings of a workshop of experts convened in Lisbon, Portugal to discuss the current state of knowledge on beach sand microbiological quality and to develop suggestions for standardizing the evaluation of sand at coastal beaches. The expert group at the "Microareias 2012" workshop recommends that 1) beach sand should be screened for a variety of pathogens harmful to human health, and sand monitoring should then be initiated alongside regular water monitoring; 2) sampling and analysis protocols should be standardized to allow proper comparisons among beach locations; and 3) further studies are needed to estimate human health risk with exposure to contaminated beach sand. Much of the manuscript is focused on research specific to Portugal, but similar results have been found elsewhere, and the findings have worldwide implications.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2012 - 2013 School Year, August 20, 2013

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2011 - 2012 School Year, November 20, 2012

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2013-2014 School Year, August 15, 2014

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health Oral Health Bureau School Dental Screening Audit Report - State Summary 2008-2009 School Year, December 1, 2009

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health Oral Health Bureau School Dental Screening Audit Report - State Summary 2009-2010 School Year, December 1, 2010

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2010 - 2011 School Year, September 14, 2011

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2014-2015 School Year, August 11, 2015

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2013-2014 School Year, August 15, 2014

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

Iowa Department of Public Health School Dental Screening Requirement - State Compliance 2014-2015 School Year, September 11, 2015

School dental screening of all high schools in Iowa that have participated. A state summary.

On the rationale of population screening for chronic kidney disease : a public health perspective

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its complications represent an enormous and increasing public health burden worldwide [1]. More than one in ten adults suffers from CKD in the general population [2], with a majority of people being in its early stages (i.e. 1 to 3) [2]. In the general population, the prevalence of CKD sharply increases with age [3]. CKD can be considered as a condition associated with premature ageing with accelerated vascular disease [4]. The large number of people with CKD, or at high risk of CKD (i.e. patients with hypertension, diabetes and/or CVD), implies that primary care providers and specialists other than nephrologists frequently encounter patients with CKD [5], a situation in which most CKD cases are diagnosed via opportunistic kidney function screening or automated eGFR reporting. The aim of this review is to discuss the rationale and currently available evidence for, or against, population-based screening for CKD. The focus will be on the situation of screening asymptomatic individuals at early stages of CKD regardless of the presence or absence of CKD risk factors.

Screening and overdiagnosis : public health implications

Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of an abnormality that bears no substantial health hazard and no benefit for patients to be aware of. Resulting mainly from the use of increasingly sensitive screening and diagnostic tests, as well as broadened definitions of conditions requiring an intervention, overdiagnosis is a growing but still largely misunderstood public health issue. Fear of missing a diagnosis or of litigation, financial incentives or patient's need of reassurance are further causes of overdiagnosis. The main consequence of overdiagnosis is overtreatment. Treating an overdiagnosed condition bears no benefit but can cause harms and generates costs. Overtreatment also diverts health professionals from caring for those most severely ill. Recognition of overdiagnosis due to screening is challenging since it is rarely identifiable at the individual level and difficult to quantify precisely at the population level. Overdiagnosis exists even for screening of proven efficacy and efficiency. Measures to reduce overdiagnosis due to screening include heightened sensitization of health professionals and patients, active surveillance and deferred treatment until early signs of disease progression and prognosis estimation through biomarkers (including molecular) profiling. Targeted screening and balanced information on its risk and benefits would also help limit overdiagnosis. Research is needed to assess the the public health burden and implications of overdiagnosis due to screening activity.

Performance of diagnostic centers in the classification of opportunistic screening mammograms from the Brazilian public health system (SUS)

Objective To evaluate the performance of diagnostic centers in the classification of mammography reports from an opportunistic screening undertaken by the Brazilian public health system (SUS) in the municipality of Goiânia, GO, Brazil in 2010. Materials and Methods The present ecological study analyzed data reported to the Sistema de Informação do Controle do Câncer de Mama (SISMAMA) (Breast Cancer Management Information System) by diagnostic centers involved in the mammographic screening developed by the SUS. Based on the frequency of mammograms per BI-RADS® category and on the limits established for the present study, the authors have calculated the rate of conformity for each diagnostic center. Diagnostic centers with equal rates of conformity were considered as having equal performance. Results Fifteen diagnostic centers performed mammographic studies for SUS and reported 31,198 screening mammograms. The performance of the diagnostic centers concerning BI-RADS classification has demonstrated that none of them was in conformity for all categories, one center presented conformity in five categories, two centers, in four categories, three centers, in three categories, two centers, in two categories, four centers, in one category, and three centers with no conformity. Conclusion The results of the present study demonstrate unevenness in the diagnostic centers performance in the classification of mammograms reported to SISMAMA from the opportunistic screening undertaken by SUS.

TOXOPLASMOSIS-RELATED KNOWLEDGE AMONG PREGNANT AND POSTPARTUM WOMEN ATTENDED IN PUBLIC HEALTH UNITS IN NITERÓI, RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL

The present study conducted a toxoplasmosis-related knowledge level survey with 400 pregnant and puerperal women attended in public health units in the municipality of Niterói, Rio de Janeiro. Only 111 (27.8%) women claimed to know about the disease. Most of them (n = 289; 72.2%) had never heard about toxoplasmosis nor knew how to prevent the infection by Toxoplasma gondii. A significant difference (p = 0.013) regarding the presence of anti-T. gondii IgG was observed between women who claimed to know about the disease and those who had never heard about it. These results highlight the importance of a systematic serological screening process for toxoplasmosis, as well as the importance of primary prevention by accurate information during prenatal care, an important Public Health action to be implemented.