Abstract
In the Republic of Serbia, trichinosis is subject to mandatory reporting. Surveillance of trichinosis is carried out within the national system of passive surveillance. Surveillance units are all health facilities that detect cases. District public health centers (n=24) classify cases based on the case definition provided in the decision of the Commission of the European Union (No. 2012/506/EU). The aim of this paper is to describe epidemiological data on trichinosis in Serbia for the period from 2001 to 2022. Surveillance data have been descriptively analyzed. Trends in trichinosis incidence rates were analyzed for the whole country and for all individual districts using a Joinpoint regression model. In the period from 2001 to 2022, 2922 cases of trichinosis have been reported (38.94 per 100,000 inhabitants). The average number of registered cases is 133 (ranging from 577 in 2002 to 0 in 2021). In the Republic of Serbia, in the period from 2001 to 2022, a trend of decreasing incidence rate of trichinosis has been registered, which has been statistically significant since 2004. A statistically significant downward trend in the incidence rate was registered both in the Belgrade District during the entire observed period and in the Central Banat District until 2004. After a multi-year, statistically significant drop in the incidence rate, in the Toplica and Braničevo Districts, a sharp increase has been registered since 2020, which is statistically significant. Epidemiological data on trichinosis in Serbia in the observed period are in line with the usual epidemiological patterns of trichinosis in humans. Despite annual fluctuations in the number of reported cases, the overall trend is decreasing, which may indicate effective measures of prevention and control.
Publisher
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
Reference17 articles.
1. Pozio E, Ludovisi A, Pezzotti P, Bruschi F, Gómez-Morales MÁ. Retrospective analysis of hospital discharge records for cases of trichinellosis does not allow evaluation of disease burden in Italy. Parasite. 2019; 26: 42. https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2019043;
2. Barruet R, Devez A, Dupouy-Camet J, Karadjian G, Plavsa D, Chydériotis G, et al. A common source for a trichinellosis outbreak reported in France and Serbia in 2017. Euro Surveill. 2020; 25(24): 1900527. https:// doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.24.1900527;
3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Trichinellosis. In: ECDC. Annual epidemiological report for 2019. Stockholm: ECDC; 2021. 6p. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/TRIC_AER_2019_Report.pdf;
4. Pozio E. The impact of globalization and climate change on Trichinella spp. epidemiology. Food Waterborne Parasitol. 2022; 27: e00154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fawpar.2022.e00154;
5. Marucci G, Tonanzi D, Interisano M, Vatta P, Galati F, La Rosa G. The International Trichinella Reference Centre database. Report on thirty-three years of activity and future perspectives. Food Waterborne Parasitol. 2022; 27: e00156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fawpar.2022.e00156;