Back to Top Skip to main content Skip to sub-navigation

Tick-borne encephalitis surveillance in U.S. military service members and beneficiaries, 2006–2018

Image of ©ECDC/Photo by Guy Hendrickx. Tickbite. ©ECDC/Photo by Guy Hendrickx

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

ABSTRACT

The risk of tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries residing in or traveling to Europe has not been assessed since the 1990s. The primary objective of this study was to assess the current risk of TBE in this population. Records of reportable medical events, inpatient and outpatient care, and laboratory test results were searched for TBE cases between 2006 and 2018. There were 8 individuals who met the case definition for TBE over the 13-year interval; 7 cases occurred during 2017 or 2018. Outpatient records did not identify any additional verified cases of TBE but revealed a large number of misclassified diagnoses. The risk of TBE among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries is low but may have increased in recent years. Military members and their dependents residing in Europe or Asia generally have a risk for TBE similar to that of other residents of the host nation. Additionally, there may be locations or activities that place certain individuals or units at increased risk for TBE, thus warranting additional control measures such as active surveillance, enhanced personal protective measures, and vaccination.

WHAT ARE THE NEW FINDINGS?    

The risk of TBE among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries is low but not negligible. There were 8 cases of TBE among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries between 2006 and 2018, 7 of which occurred in 2017 or 2018. Case finding using outpatient data did not identify additional cases and revealed a large number of misclassified diagnoses.

WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON READINESS AND FORCE HEALTH PROTECTION?

Although the risk of TBE among U.S. military personnel and their dependents is similar to residents of the host nation, there may be locations and activities that place individuals and military units at increased risk. U.S. military public health activities in Europe should ensure the implementation of TBE control measures, including accurate and timely surveillance, proper personal protective and tick avoidance measures, and risk-based vaccination.

BACKGROUND

In 2012, tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) became a notifiable disease for healthcare professionals in Europe to report to public health agencies. Since then, the reported incidence of TBE in Europe has increased. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has concluded that this increase is “consistent with a stable long-term trend” in the European Union, possibly related to environmental conditions.1 However, it is also possible that this increase may be influenced by enhanced surveillance and diagnosis rather than (or in addition to) a true increase in the incidence of disease.

In 2016, there were 2,674 confirmed cases of TBE reported across the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA), for an overall incidence of 0.6 per 100,000 population.1 In Germany, the European country in which the greatest number of U.S. military service members and beneficiaries are stationed, surveillance for TBE (also called Frühsommer-Meningoenzephalitis [FSME] in German) by health authorities began much earlier—in 2001. The majority (89.0%) of TBE cases in Germany reported between 2001 and 2018 occurred in the southern states of Baden-Wurttemberg (BW) and Bavaria,2 both of which contain U.S. military installations and personnel. The annual incidence rate of TBE in Germany during that time period ranged from 0.7 to 2.0 cases per 100,000 persons per year, but the average rate in high-risk areas such as BW and Bavaria was 3.7 (range: 0–48) cases per 100,000 persons per year.2 While there was no significant change in TBE incidence noted between 2001 and 2016, the years of 2017 and 2018 were marked by an increase in rates compared to the previous years. Countries in the Baltic states had the highest reported rates of disease, although comparisons between countries are difficult because of differences in case definitions, laboratory diagnosis, and other surveillance capabilities.3

U.S. military personnel may engage in activities or behaviors that place them at risk for increased contact with the primary tick vector responsible for TBE transmission, Ixodes ricinus. These activities include hiking and camping and outdoor work activities such as forest work or military field exercises.4,5 In the 1980s and 1990s, serological studies of U.S. military service members in areas felt to have high risk for TBE found a relatively low seroprevalence (7.2%) among soldiers stationed in Bavaria and Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany,6 and low rates of infection (0.9 and 0.7 seroconversions per 1,000 person-months) in Germany and Bosnia, respectively.7,8 Only 1 reported case of symptomatic but unconfirmed TBE disease was found in a review of all inpatient medical records from facilities in central Europe from 1970 to 1983.7 Nevertheless, these historical data are not adequate to estimate the current risk to U.S. service members and their dependents, and no assessment of TBE incidence in U.S. military service members or beneficiaries has been published since the 1990s. Furthermore, most prior studies only assessed the risk of TBE in small, focally defined areas, and the risk to U.S. military personnel in the countries of eastern Europe and Asia is unknown.

The primary objective of this study was to determine the number of TBE cases among all U.S. military service members and other beneficiaries worldwide between 2006 and 2018, with a special focus on the risk of TBE in Europe, in order to inform current public health risk assessment and force health protection posture. Although TBE is reportable for all Department of Defense (DoD) beneficiaries in the military’s reportable medical events (RMEs) system under the category “arboviral disease,”9 some cases might not be reported since TBE is not a reportable disease in the U.S. civilian public health system10 and because healthcare providers may not be aware of U.S. military and German reporting requirements. The secondary objectives of this study were to examine the completeness and accuracy of various data sources, evaluate existing case-finding algorithms, and determine a valid TBE surveillance case definition for future use.

METHODS

This investigation was reviewed and approved by the Defense Health Agency’s Human Research Protections Office as a public health surveillance activity. The population at risk was all U.S. military service members and beneficiaries between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2018. For the primary analysis, possible TBE cases were identified by examination of all outpatient and inpatient encounters and all RMEs in the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS)11 with a diagnosis of TBE (parent International Classification of Diseases, 9th [ICD-9] and 10th [ICD-10] Revision codes of 063 or A84, respectively). The TBE case definitions established by the ECDC were used to classify the cases.12 The clinical criteria included any person with symptoms of inflammation of the central nervous system. To be a confirmed case, the patient had to meet the clinical criteria and have at least 1 of the following 5 laboratory findings: 1) TBE-specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in blood, 2) TBE-specific IgM antibodies in the cerebrospinal fluid, 3) seroconversion or 4-fold increase of TBE-specific antibodies in paired serum samples, 4) detection of TBE viral nucleic acid in a clinical specimen, or 5) isolation of TBE virus from a clinical specimen. A probable case was defined as any person who met the clinical criteria and had either 1) an epidemiological link or 2) detection of TBE-specific IgM antibodies in a unique serum sample. Only confirmed or probable cases were included in the analysis.

The data repository of the military’s electronic medical record (EMR), the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), was reviewed to determine whether the subset of individuals with a record of a TBE diagnosis identified in DMSS records between 2016 and 2018 met the case definition. The review of AHLTA records included examination of all outpatient, inpatient, vaccine, and laboratory records from military treatment facilities (MTFs) in the EMR. Of note, the EMR also included scanned records of inpatient and outpatient encounters that occurred at non-MTFs. Information from hospitalizations at host nation medical facilities was obtained through English translations of the discharge summaries that had also been scanned and uploaded into the EMR. When records were not sufficiently complete to determine whether the patient had been a true TBE case, the patient was contacted via phone (if contact information was available) to obtain additional information.

To evaluate the completeness and accuracy of various alternative data sources and determine a surveillance case definition for future use, additional record reviews were performed. Laboratory records were available from 2006 through 2018 and included all TBE positive lab results from the EpiData Center (EDC) at the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Public Health Center.13,14 Of note, these laboratory data included only tests that were performed or reported by an MTF. Findings were also compared with those obtained from direct and Purchased CareThe TRICARE Health Program is often referred to as purchased care. It is the services we “purchase” through the managed care support contracts.purchased care data from TRICARE Europe found in the Military Health System Data Repository (MDR), again using inpatient and outpatient TBE diagnoses that occurred in Europe between 2016 and 2018. The sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of these alternate data sources were estimated in accordance with U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S. CDC) guidelines for the evaluation of surveillance systems.15 Because of the small number of cases and lack of appropriate denominators, rates were not calculated.

RESULTS

During 2006–2018, a total of 8 individuals met the TBE case definition (4 confirmed and 4 probable) (Figure 1). Table 1 shows a list of the cases and their characteristics. Laboratory results and disease sequelae were inconsistently documented in the EMR. All cases had reported fever; other symptoms were variable. Five of the cases were service members and 3 were dependent children. Although the numbers are small, the number of cases in 2017–2018 (n=7) greatly exceeded the number from the previous 11 years (n=1), suggesting an increased TBE risk in recent years. The cases all occurred during the expected months of April through November. Of note, no cases were travelers to or residents of any location other than in Europe or in any German states other than BW and Bavaria. None of the cases had a prior history of TBE vaccine.

In order to assess the validity of the TBE definition, the medical records were reviewed for the 166 unique individuals with diagnoses of TBE identified from RMEs and outpatient and inpatient records in the DMSS between 2016 and 2018. Of these unique individuals, 157 had outpatient TBE diagnoses, 15 had inpatient diagnoses, and 5 had RMEs. Of the 166 individuals, 7 (4.2%) were determined to meet the case definition for confirmed (4) or probable (3) TBE. There was 1 additional record of TBE from Navy and Marine Corps Public Health Center laboratory data in an individual who had no TBE records in the DMSS, for a total of 167 individuals with a TBE record. The overlap of records among these different data sources is shown in Figure 2. The PPV and sensitivity of the types of records and diagnoses are listed in Table 2. All of the 7 cases were found to have either an inpatient (6) or an RME (5) diagnosis of TBE, and 4 had both. All 5 individuals with an RME were hospitalized, although 1 had an inpatient ICD-10 diagnosis code of A86 (viral encephalitis, unspecified). Of the 17 individuals who had either an RME, hospitalization, or lab record of TBE, 8 (47.1%) had no evidence of residence or medical care in Europe. Of the 9 hospitalized cases with a misclassified TBE diagnosis, 4 had a diagnosis of another tick-borne disease such as suspected Lyme disease, history of prior Lyme disease, or Rocky Mountain spotted fever. Of the remaining 5 individuals, 1 had long-standing headache symptoms and tested negative for TBE; the others had little or no documentation in their available health records to substantiate a diagnosis of TBE. Of the 157 outpatient diagnoses in the DMSS, 57 were diagnosed in Europe and 100 were either diagnosed outside of Europe or the place of care could not be determined. Of the 50 outpatient diagnoses from Europe that did not meet the case definition, 47 (94.0%) had an encounter for TBE vaccination on the date of TBE diagnosis, 1 (2.0%) had headache or other suggestive symptoms but did not meet the clinical case definition, and 2 (4.0%) had no visits in the EMR on or around the diagnosis date. Of the 100 outpatient cases diagnosed outside of Europe, none met the case definition. Most of these diagnoses occurred in the U.S. among retirees who had no record of care at an MTF. The few who did receive care at an MTF were seen for a tick or other insect bite.

For the period from 2006 through 2015, medical records were reviewed only for those 22 individuals who had an inpatient or RME diagnosis of TBE; only 1 of these individuals met the case definition. All 22 had an inpatient diagnosis of TBE and none had an RME.

Finally, the alternative data sources, including EDC laboratory and TRICARE Europe inpatient and outpatient data (from the MDR) were examined to identify additional cases of TBE. There were 2 individuals with a positive laboratory test for TBE between 2006 and 2018. One individual had already been identified as an RME, and the other did not meet the case definition (sensitivity=14.2%; PPV=50%). TRICARE Europe data from inpatient and outpatient care in Europe revealed 104 individuals with a TBE diagnosis between 2016 and 2018, 57 of whom were also ascertained from DMSS data. All 7 of the confirmed or probable TBE cases were included in this group (sensitivity=100%; PPV=6.7%). Of the additional 47 individuals identified with a TBE diagnosis who were not ascertained from DMSS data, all had only outpatient TBE diagnoses and none met the case definition for TBE. Thirty-seven (78.7%) of the 47 individuals had a medical encounter for TBE vaccine that was miscoded as TBE disease.

EDITORIAL COMMENT

Of the 8 confirmed or probable cases of TBE among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries during the 13-year surveillance period, 7 occurred in 2017 or 2018. Five of the cases occurred in service members and 3 in children; all cases occurred in Germany in the states of BW or Bavaria. There were no cases of TBE identified among U.S. military service members or beneficiaries traveling to Europe. All but 1 of the cases were hospitalized in a host nation medical facility, and most of the case information was extracted from translations of those hospitalization records. RME surveillance identified 5 of the cases, while laboratory data identified only 1. This is not surprising, as only laboratory tests from MTFs could reliably be obtained and only 1 of the cases was treated in an MTF. Additional case finding using outpatient records revealed large numbers of misclassified cases regardless of data source, largely from medical encounters for TBE vaccine or tick bites that were miscoded as TBE disease. In summary, review of outpatient records identified no additional cases of TBE beyond those already found in RME and inpatient records.

This study provides an update to the current knowledge about the risk of TBE among service members and other beneficiaries. Two previous military studies examined the risk of infection in Germany and Bosnia by assessing seroconversion and found no cases of TBE disease.6,8 Another military study reviewed military hospitalization data in Europe and found 1 case of unconfirmed TBE in military medical records between 1970 and 1983, a time when a much larger number of military personnel were living in Germany.7 The incidence rate of TBE in Germany was 2.0 per 100,000 in 2018, with a rate of 3.7 in higher-risk areas such as BW and Bavaria.2 Given these rates and based on a population of approximately 50,000 U.S. military service members and beneficiaries dispersed throughout Germany, approximately 1 case per year would be expected. The current study found a very similar overall number of 8 cases over a 13-year period, with all but 1 case identified during the past 2 years. Although small numbers precluded formal statistical testing, the increased number of cases in 2017 and 2018 seen here is similar to the statistically significant increases reported in the German population. Additionally, the experiences in nearby Austria demonstrate the focal nature of TBE and the potential of TBE to emerge in previously unaffected populations despite high vaccination coverage.16 No cases among military-associated travelers to Europe were seen in the current study, consistent with prior assessments of low risk among most travelers.5,17 While only 7 cases of TBE among non-military U.S. travelers were reported between 2000 and 2015, TBE is not a notifiable condition in the U.S., so additional cases may have occurred.5

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends routine TBE vaccination in areas where the disease is highly endemic (defined as a rate of = 5 per 100,000 per year).18 In regions with lower incidence, WHO recommends targeting only those who are at higher than baseline risk and those that engage in extensive outdoor activities. The U.S. CDC suggests considering vaccination for those “anticipating high-risk exposures” as well as those “living in TBE-endemic countries for an extended period of time” but does not provide specific recommendations related to TBE vaccination.German policy among the civilian population is to vaccinate beginning at age 1 year if “substantial exposure” is anticipated but otherwise recommends deferring vaccination to age 3 years because of the risk of vaccine-related adverse events in the 1- to 2-year age group.19 Despite these recommendations, only 27% of the population is estimated to have been vaccinated against TBE, including only 37–40% in the higher-risk areas of BW and Bavaria.20 German military personnel are all required to receive TBE vaccine in order to be prepared to support national emergency response efforts in endemic areas (K. Erkens, MD, Lt Col, Bundeswehr, email communication, 13 November 2019).

The U.S. military has prior experience with TBE vaccine in Europe. As the vaccine is not licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), it must be obtained and administered by host nation providers in Europe outside the U.S. Military Health System. Although many service members and other U.S. military beneficiaries have obtained the vaccine, most of those residing in Germany never receive it. During deployment to Bosnia in the 1990s, the U.S. military’s desire to mitigate TBE risk resulted in TBE vaccine being made available to all DoD personnel at high risk of tick exposure.8 Since the vaccine was not licensed by the FDA, it could not be made mandatory for service members, so the vaccine was administered on a voluntary basis under an investigational new drug protocol. After several years, the program was discontinued because of improper documentation and “significant deviation” from the protocol noted by the Government Accounting Office and FDA.21 The European Command (EUCOM) and DoD public health leadership are now considering ways to obtain FDA licensure in order to offer TBE vaccine to service members and other beneficiaries living in or traveling to Europe who would be at high risk for TBE exposure. The findings of this study support the current recommendations to vaccinate only those U.S. military service members and beneficiaries at higher risk for TBE acquisition because of residence in an area of high endemicity or participation in extensive outdoor activities.5,17,18

Limitations of this study include a small number of cases and the potential for misclassification of outcome. Patients seeking care at host nation healthcare facilities may be undercounted in this report because these encounters and laboratory results may be insufficiently documented in AHTLA, thus not meeting the case definition applied here. This undercounting is expected to be modest in the active component because about 82% of these service members’ outpatient encounters and 68% of their inpatient encounters occur at MTFs.22,23 Although about 90% of non-service member beneficiary encounters occur outside of MTFs,24 potential undercounting is mitigated by the TRICARE Overseas Program contract requirement that the contractor translate medical documentation on request (S. Lynch, TRICARE Overseas Program Office, email communication, 24 July 2019). Many European MTFs appear to be actively engaged in obtaining/translating purchased care medical documentation and uploading it into the Health Artifact and Image Management Solution (HAIMS), which not only provides documentation for follow-up medical care but also allows for better public health surveillance and response.

Additionally, failure of healthcare providers to recognize TBE and comply with established diagnostic guidelines also may contribute to underestimation of disease.19,25 Asymptomatic and subclinical infection and failure of infected individuals to seek care also contribute to the undercounting of cases. The prevalence of subclinical infection would best be assessed by repeating prior studies of seroconversion, which has not been done in Germany since the early 1990s.6 On the other hand, recent increases in cases seen in Germany could be attributable to increased surveillance and awareness related to the 2012 ECDC reporting requirement. However, because Germany has required TBE case notification since 2001, this seems less likely. Because many of the hospitalizations attributed to TBE were actually from other tick-borne diseases, further provider education on and awareness of these diseases is indicated, as is ensuring their proper prevention, detection, and response. Updated recommendations on the diagnosis and management of tick-borne diseases in the U.S. are summarized for providers and public health practitioners in a recent U.S. CDC publication.26 Finally, the results from military populations may not be generalizable to U.S. travelers or other populations because of differences in occupational and other outdoor exposures.

Results of this study suggest that the RME case definition performs fairly well for routine surveillance of TBE. If a more precise estimate is desired, a modest improvement is possible by adding active surveillance of hospitalizations for TBE. However, because of a large proportion of misclassified diagnoses, record reviews are necessary to ascertain whether these additional diagnoses meet the case definition in order to accurately estimate the true TBE burden, assess public health risk, and inform force health protection posture. The ability to perform record review relies on the continuation of the current practice in EUCOM of entering records from care received at host nation medical facilities into the EMR. While the record review conducted in the current study indicated fairly complete documentation in the EMR of care received at host nation medical facilities in Germany, records from hospitalizations in the U.S. were uncommonly found in the EMR. Current surveillance for TBE can be further improved by increased awareness of clinical guidelines for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in both adults and children.17,19,25 Current TBE surveillance can also be improved by increased awareness of and adherence to DoD and host nation reporting requirements so that RMEs can be used to better detect changing trends in TBE incidence. Alternate case finding methods such as laboratory data and outpatient visits are likely to have minimal impact on TBE surveillance because of poor sensitivity and PPV, respectively. Human seroprevalence studies can be a useful complementary surveillance indicator but may be confounded from cross-reactivity to other flaviviruses or viruses of the TBE complex.6–8 Virus prevalence in ticks has been found to be of questionable value in surveillance efforts,27 a finding that is supported by the fact that only 4 of 1,153 ticks (0.3%) tested from passive surveillance at U.S. military installations in Europe from 2012 through 2018 were found to be infected with TBE (A. Cline, MAJ, U.S. Army Public Health Command-Europe, email communication, 20 May 2019).

The number of confirmed or probable TBE cases among U.S. military service members and beneficiaries is low but not negligible and has increased in recent years. Although military members and their dependents generally have the same risk for TBE as other residents of the host nation and should follow U.S. CDC guidance for travelers to these areas, there may be locations or activities that place these individuals at higher risk for disease. Commanders and U.S. military public health personnel in Europe should be familiar with and anticipate high-risk areas and activities U.S. personnel are likely to encounter. Furthermore, they should ensure that TBE control measures include accurate and timely surveillance, proper personal protective measures (PPMs), tick avoidance, and risk-based vaccination. There are several ways in which individuals and units can reduce their risk of TBE infection. Service members and dependents at risk for TBE should be counseled to avoid consuming unpasteurized dairy products, which can transmit TBE. Service members and dependents should also be counseled to use PPMs, particularly during field exercises and other outdoor activities and when stationed or visiting focal areas of increased TBE risk. PPMs include the DoD repellant system, which consists of maximally covering exposed skin with clothing, applying permethrin to clothing, and applying repellants to remaining exposed skin. Finally, service members and dependents should follow a risk-based strategy for vaccination consistent with national and international recommendations,5,17,18,25 and the U.S. military should consider the risks and benefits of compulsory TBE vaccination of service members, similar to German military policy.


Author affiliations: Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch, Public Health Division, Defense Health Agency, Silver Spring, MD

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge Mr. Nicholas Seliga, EpiData Center, Navy and Marine Corps Public Health Center, for his assistance with the laboratory data; Mr. Shannon Lynch for his assistance obtaining data from the Military Health System Data Repository; Dr. Kay Erkens, Lt Col, Kommando Sanitätsdienst, UAbt VI 2.2, for consultation on German military vaccination policy; LTC Luke Mease for his review of and comments on an earlier version of this manuscript; and MAJ Amanda Cline, U.S. Army Public Health Command-Europe, for supplying the results from TBE tick surveillance in Europe.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or of the U.S. Government.

Sources of support: Support was provided by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch of the Public Health Division at the Defense Health Agency.

REFERENCES

1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Annual epidemiological report for 2016: tick-borne encephalitis. Stockholm: ECDC;2018.

2. Hellenbrand W, Kreusch T, Bohmer MM, et al. Epidemiology of tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) in Germany, 2001–2018. Pathogens. 2019;8(2):e42.

3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Technical report: Epidemiological situation of tick-borne encephalitis in the European Union and European Free Trade Association countries. https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/media/en/publications/Publications/TBE-in-EU-EFTA.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2019.

4. Lindquist L, Vapalahti O. Tick-borne encephalitis. Lancet. 2008;371(9627):1861–1871.

5. Fischer M, Gould CV, Rollin, PE. Tickborne encephalitis. In: Brunette GW, Nemhauser JB, eds. CDC Yellow Book 2020: Health Information for International Travel. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2019:348.

6. Clement J, Leirs H, Armour V, et al. Serologic evidence for tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) in North-American military stationed in Germany. Acta Leiden. 1992;60(2):15–17.

7. McNeil JG, Lednar WM, Stansfield SK, Prier RE, Miller RN. Central European tick-borne encephalitis: assessment of risk for persons in the armed services and vacationers. J Infect Dis. 1985;152(3):650–651.

8. Craig SC, Pittman PR, Lewis TE, et al. An accelerated schedule for tick-borne encephalitis vaccine: the American military experience in Bosnia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1999;61(6):874–878.

9. Defense Health Agency. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Armed Forces Reportable Medical Events. Guidelines and Case Definitions, 2017. https://health.mil/reference-Center/Publications/2017/07/17/Armed-Forces-Reportable-Medical-Events-Guidelines. Accessed 9 April 2019.

10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2019 National Notifiable Infectious Diseases. https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/notifiable/2019/infectious-diseases/. Accessed 12 April 2019.

11. Rubertone MV, Brundage JF. The Defense Medical Surveillance System and the Department of Defense serum repository: glimpses of the future of public health surveillance. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(12):1900–1904.

12. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. EU case definitions. https://ecdc.europa.eu/en/surveillance-and-disease-data/eu-case-definitions. Accessed 9 April 2019.

13. Nowak G. Description of the MHS Health Level 7 Chemistry Laboratory for Public Health Surveillance: Technical Document NMCPHC-EDCTD-1-2014. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590932.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2019.

14. Chukwuma U, Nowak G. Description of the MHS Health Level 7 Microbiology Laboratory for Public Health Surveillance: Technical Document NMCPHC-EDC-TD-1-2013. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590818.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2019.

15. German RR, Lee LM, Horan JM, et al. Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems: recommendations from the Guidelines Working Group. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001;50(RR-13):1–35.

16. Heinz FX, Stiasny K, Holzmann H, et al. Emergence of tick-borne encephalitis in new endemic areas in Austria: 42 years of surveillance. Euro Surveill. 2015;20(13):9–16.

17. Steffen R. Epidemiology of tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) in international travellers to Western/Central Europe and conclusions on vaccination recommendations. J Travel Med. 2016;23(4):1–10.

18. World Health Organization. Vaccines against tick-borne encephalitis: WHO position paper. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2011;86(24):241–256.

19. Steffen R. Tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) in children in Europe: epidemiology, clinical outcome and comparison of vaccination recommendations. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2019;10(1):100–110.

20. Erber W, Schmitt HJ. Self-reported tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) vaccination coverage in Europe: results from a cross-sectional study. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2018;9(4):768–777.

21. Friedman MA. Letter From Department of Health and Human Services to Edward D. Martin, M.D., Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affaires. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration; 22 July 1997.

22. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Ambulatory visits, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018. MSMR. 2019;26(5):19–25.

23. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Hospitalizations, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018. MSMR. 2019;26(5):11–18.

24. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, non-service member beneficiaries of the Military Health System, 2018. MSMR. 2019;26(5):40–50.

25. Taba P, Schmutzhard E, Forsberg P, et al. EAN consensus review on prevention, diagnosis and management of tick-borne encephalitis. Eur J Neurol. 2017;24(10):1214–e1261.

26. Biggs HM, Behravesh CB, Bradley KK, et al. Diagnosis and management of tickborne rickettsial diseases: Rocky Mountain spotted fever and other spotted fever group rickettsioses, ehrlichioses, and anaplasmosis—United States. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(2):1–44.

27. Imhoff M, Hagedorn P, Schulze Y, Hellenbrand W, Pfeffer M, Niedrig M. Review: Sentinels of tick-borne encephalitis risk. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2015;6(5):592–600.

 

You also may be interested in...

MSMR Vol. 29 No. 07 - July 2022

Report
7/1/2022

A monthly publication of the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. This issue of the peer-reviewed journal contains the following articles: Surveillance trends for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens among U.S. Military Health System Beneficiaries, Sept. 27, 2020 – Oct. 2,2021; Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance within the MHS during March 1 – Dec. 31 2020; Suicide behavior among heterosexual, lesbian/gay, and bisexual active component service members in the U.S. Armed Forces; Brief report: Phase I results using the Virtual Pooled Registry Cancer Linkage system (VPR-CLS) for military cancer surveillance.

Recommended Content:

Health Readiness & Combat Support | Public Health | Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Absolute and Relative Morbidity Burdens Attributable to Various Illnesses and Injuries, Non-service Member Beneficiaries of the Military Health System, 2021

Article
6/1/2022

In 2021, mental health disorders accounted for the largest proportions of the morbidity and health care burdens that affected the pediatric and younger adult beneficiary age groups. Among adults aged 45–64 and those aged 65 or older, musculoskeletal diseases accounted for the most morbidity and health care burdens. As in previous years, this report documents a substantial majority of non-service member beneficiaries received care for current illness and injury from the Military Health System as outsourced services at non-military medical facilities.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, reserve component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022
Surveillance snapshot: Illness and injury burdens, reserve component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Morbidity Burdens Attributable to Various Illnesses and Injuries, Deployed Active and Reserve Component Service Members, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022

As in previous years, among service members deployed during 2021, injury/poisoning, musculoskeletal diseases and signs/symptoms accounted for more than half of the total health care burden during deployment. Compared to garrison disease burden, deployed service members had relatively higher proportions of encounters for respiratory infections, skin diseases, and infectious and parasitic diseases. The recent marked increase in the percentage of total medical encounters attributable to the ICD diagnostic category "other" (23.0% in 2017 to 44.4% in 2021) is likely due to increases in diagnostic testing and immunization associated with the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Medical Evacuations out of the U.S. Central and U.S. Africa Commands, Active and Reserve Components, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022
Medical Evacuations out of the U.S. Central and U.S. Africa Commands, Active and Reserve Components, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

The proportions of evacuations out of USCENTCOM that were due to battle injuries declined substantially in 2021. For USCENTCOM, evacuations for mental health disorders were the most common, followed by non-battle injury and poisoning, and signs, symptoms, and ill-defined conditions. For USAFRICOM, evacuations for non-battle injury and poisoning were most common, followed by disorders of the digestive system and mental health disorders.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Ambulatory Visits, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022

In 2021, the overall numbers and rates of active component service member ambulatory care visits were the highest of any of the last 10 years. Most categories of illness and injury showed modest increases in numbers and rates. The proportions of ambulatory care visits that were accomplished via telehealth encounters fell to under 15% in 2021, compared to 19% in 2020.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Hospitalizations, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022

The hospitalization rate in 2021 was 48.0 per 1,000 person-years (p-yrs), the second lowest rate of the most recent 10 years. For hospitalizations limited to military facilities, the rate in 2021 was the lowest for the entire period. As in prior years, the majority (71.2%) of hospitalizations were associated with diagnoses in the categories of mental health disorders, pregnancy-related conditions, injury/poisoning, and digestive system disorders.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Absolute and Relative Morbidity Burdens Attributable to Various Illnesses and Injuries, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
6/1/2022

In 2021, as in prior years, the medical conditions associated with the most medical encounters, the largest number of affected service members, and the greatest number of hospital days were in the major categories of injuries, musculoskeletal disorders, and mental health disorders. Despite the pandemic, COVID-19 accounted for less than 2% of total medical encounters and bed days in active component service members.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance Snapshot: Tick-borne Encephalitis in Military Health System Beneficiaries, 2012–2021

Article
5/1/2022
iStock—The castor bean tick (Ixoedes ricinus). Credit: Erik Karits

Tick-borne Encephalitis in Military Health System Beneficiaries, 2012–2021. Tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) is a viral infection of the central nervous system that is transmitted by the bite of infected ticks, mostly found in wooded habitats in parts of Europe and Asia

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Evaluation of ICD-10-CM-based Case Definitions of Ambulatory Encounters for COVID-19 Among Department of Defense Health Care Beneficiaries

Article
5/1/2022
SEATTLE, WA, UNITED STATES 04.05.2020 U.S. Army Maj. Neil Alcaria is screened at the Seattle Event Center in Wash., April 5. Soldiers from Fort Carson, Colo., and Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash. have established an Army field hospital center at the center in support of the Department of Defense COVID-19 response. U.S. Northern Command, through U.S. Army North, is providing military support to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help communities in need. (U.S. Army photo by Cpl. Rachel Thicklin)

This is the first evaluation of ICD-10-CM-based cased definitions for COVID-19 surveillance among DOD health care beneficiaries. The 3 case definitions ranged from highly specific to a lower specificity, but improved balance between sensitivity and specificity.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Sexually Transmitted Infections, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2021

Article
5/1/2022
This illustration depicts a 3D computer-generated image of a number of drug-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae bacteria. CDC/James Archer

This report summarizes incidence rates of the 5 most common sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among active component service members of the U.S. Armed Forces during 2013–2021. In general, compared to their respective counterparts, younger service members, non-Hispanic Black service members, those who were single and other/unknown marital status, and enlisted service members had higher incidence rates of STIs.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

The Association Between Two Bogus Items, Demographics, and Military Characteristics in a 2019 Cross-sectional Survey of U.S. Army Soldiers

Article
5/1/2022
NIANTIC, CT, UNITED STATES 06.16.2022 U.S. Army Staff Sgt. John Young, an information technology specialist assigned to Joint Forces Headquarters, Connecticut Army National Guard, works on a computer at Camp Nett, Niantic, Connecticut, June 16, 2022. Young provided threat intelligence to cyber analysts that were part of his "Blue Team" during Cyber Yankee, a cyber training exercise meant to simulate a real world environment to train mission essential tasks for cyber professionals. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Matthew Lucibello)

Data from surveys may be used to make public health decisions at both the installation and the Department of the Army level. This study demonstrates that a vast majority of soldiers were likely sufficiently engaged and answered both bogus items correctly. Future surveys should continue to investigate careless responding to ensure data quality in military populations.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Exertional Heat Illness at Fort Benning, GA: Unique Insights from the Army Heat Center

Article
4/1/2022
Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Ryan Adams is being used as an example victim for cooling a heat casualty at the bi-annual hot weather standard operating procedure training aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., Aug. 24. Adams is demonstrating the "burrito" method used to cool a heat related injury victim. Photo by Pfc. Joshua Grant.

Exertional heat illness (hereafter referred to as heat illness) spans a spectrum from relatively mild conditions such as heat cramps and heat exhaustion, to more serious and potentially life-threatening conditions such as heat injury and exertional heat stroke (hereafter heat stroke).

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Exertional Rhabdomyolysis, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2017–2021

Article
4/1/2022
The Embry-Riddle Army ROTC Ranger Challenge team heads out on the 12-mile road march after completing the timed obstacle course event of the 6th Brigade Army ROTC Ranger Challenge January 14, 2022 at Fort Benning, Ga. The Titan Brigade’s Ranger Challenge took place at Fort Benning, Ga. January 13-15, 2022. Photo by Capt. Stephanie Snyder

Exertional rhabdomyolysis is a potentially serious condition that requires a vigilant and aggressive approach. Some service members who experience exertional rhabdomyolysis may be at risk for recurrences, which may limit their military effectiveness and potentially predispose them to serious injury.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Heat Illness, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021

Article
4/1/2022
Airmen participate in the 13th Annual Fallen Defender Ruck March at Joint Base San Antonio, Nov. 6, 2020. The event honors 186 fallen security forces, security police and air police members who have made the ultimate sacrifice. Photo By: Sarayuth Pinthong, Air Force.

From 2020 to 2021, the rate of incident heat stroke was relatively stable while the rate of heat exhaustion increased slightly

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report
<< < 1 2 3 4 5  ... > >> 
Showing results 1 - 15 Page 1 of 12
Refine your search
Last Updated: January 09, 2020

DHA Address: 7700 Arlington Boulevard | Suite 5101 | Falls Church, VA | 22042-5101

Some documents are presented in Portable Document Format (PDF). A PDF reader is required for viewing. Download a PDF Reader or learn more about PDFs.