Useful Tools in Mosquito Surveillance

Transcription

1 Useful Tools in Mosquito Surveillance

2 Denominators Infection Rates (MIR and MLE s) Data Smoothing Vector Index

3 Denominator The denominator is the lower portion of a fraction used to calculate a rate or ratio.

4 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 # Sand Flies Collected 5

5 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 3/0 # Sand Flies Collected 5 35

6 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 3/0 4/0 # Sand Flies Collected

7 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 3/0 4/0 5/0 # Sand Flies Collected

8 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 3/0 4/0 5/0 6/0 # Sand Flies Collected

9 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 2/0 3/0 4/0 5/0 6/0 7/0 # Sand Flies Collected

10 20 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, Sand Flies # flies collected Jan 3-Jan 4-Jan 5-Jan 6-Jan 7-Jan Date

11 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 3/0 3/0 4/0 5/0 6/0 7/0 # collected

12 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date 3/0 3/0 4/0 5/0 6/0 7/0 # collected Persons 2 3 3

13 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date # collected Persons Hours 3/0 5 3/ / / / /

14 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date # collected Persons Hours 3/0 5 X = 3/0 35 X 2 = 4/0 45 X 3 = 5/ X 2 = 6/ X = 7/ X 2 =

15 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date # collected Persons Hours Man hrs. 3/0 5 X = 3/0 35 X 2 = 2 4/0 45 X 3 = 3 5/ X 2 = 4 6/ X = 3 7/ X 2 = 6

16 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date # collected Man hrs. 3/0 5 = 3/ = 4/ = 5/ = 6/ = 7/ =

17 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Date # collected Persons Hours Man Hrs Flies/Man Hr 3/0 5 = 5.0 3/ = 7.5 4/ = 5.0 5/ = 2.5 6/ = / = 6.7

18 20 Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, Sand Flies # flies collected # flies collected / man hr. 3-Jan 4-Jan 5-Jan 6-Jan 7-Jan 8-Jan Date

19 Trapping Effort, Fairfax County, Year # Mosquitoes # Pools # (+) Pools # Trap Nights ,492,885 5, ,4 2, ,828 2, , ,277 3, , ,402 4, ,280

20 Conclusions Numbers can be impressive Numbers can be misleading Denominators put numbers into perspective

21 MIR MIR MIR MIR MLE MLE MIR MIR MLE MLE MLE MLE MLE MIR MIR MIR MLE MLE MIR Infection Rate MIR or MLE? That is the Question

22 Mosquito Infection Rate MLE MIR MIR MLE MLE MIR MIR MLE MLE MLE MIR MIR MIR MIR Minimum Infection Rate MLE MLE MLE MIR MLE Maximum Likelihood Estimation MIR MIR

23 MIR MLE Mosquito Infection Rate MIR MIR MLE MLE MIR MIR MIR Minimum Infection Rate Assumes infected mosquito per pool (sample) MLE MIR = # positive samples total # of mosquitoes tested MLE MLE MIR MIR MIR X,000 MLE MLE

24 MIR MLE Mosquito Infection Rate positive mosquito per MLE pool and MLE MIR MIR MLE Maximum Likelihood Estimation Considers the possibility of more than MIR MLE MLE MLE MIR MIR compensates for different sized samples Calculated with an Excel Add-In MIR MIR MLE MLE Brad Biggerstaff, CDC

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35 40 35 Maximum Likelyhood Estimation of WNV in Culex Mosquitoes Collected in gravid Traps, by Week, Fairfax, Va, 2006 MLE Upper Limitr Lower Limit In fectio n rate p er, EPI Week

36 Difference Between MIR and MLE 25 WNV Infection Rates in Culex Mosquitoes Collected in Gravid Traps, per Week, Fairfax, Va, 2006 MLE MIR Infection rate per, EPI Week

37 Difference Between MIR and MLE WNV Infection Rates in Culex Mosquitoes Collected in Gravid Traps, Fairfax, Va, 2003 MLE MIR Infection rate per EPI Week

38 Conclusions MIR does not stand for Mosquito Infection Rate You can use either MIR or MLE when IR is < 20, but you should use the MLE when IR is > 20 Use either MIR of MLE but not both MIR s and MLE s have to be calculated weekly Seasonal MIR s and MLE s don t mean anything, these shouldn t be used

39 Data Smoothing 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, 34, 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 34, 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 35,

40 Data Smoothing Data Smoothing is a form of low pass filtering = 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, 34, 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 35, It blocks out the high frequency components in order to emphasize the low frequency ones (longer trends)

41 Data Smoothing 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, 34, 25, 52, 44, 42, 44, 36, 24, 34, The running mean or 35, moving average 34, 22, 35, The exponential weighted average

42 Data Smoothing The running mean () or moving average y k = y k (x k x k-n ) n 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data 34, 25, 52, 44, 42, 44, 36, 24, 34, 35, 34, n = the size of the set of number 22, 35,

43

44 y k = y k (x k x k-n ) n y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data n = the size of the set of number

45 Data Smoothing The running mean (2) or moving average SUM(x k : x k-n ) y k = n 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data 34, 25, 52, 44, 42, 44, 36, 24, 34, 35, 34, n = the size of the set of number 22, 35,

46 SUM(x k : x k-n ) y k = n y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data n = the size of the set of number

47 Data Smoothing The exponential weighted average y k = (-b)x k + by k- 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, 34, 25, 52, 44, 42, 44, 36, 24, 34, 34, 22, 35, y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data 35, b = the fraction of the number that is used

48 y k = (-b)x k + by k- y k = new set of smoothed data x k = original set of data b = the fraction of the number that is used

49

50 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, O F Jan Feb Mar Fairfax Temperature, 2007 Data Smoothing Apr 34, 25, May Jun 44, 36, 24, 35, Jul 52, 42, 34, 44, Block out high frequency components in order to emphasize longer trends Month 34, Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 22, 35,

51 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, o F Fairfax Tempreature, , 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, Jan F eb Mar Apr May J unjul Month 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 35, Aug SepO ct Nov D ec

52 00 Fairfax Temperature, , 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, O F , 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 35, Jan Feb Mar Apr It blocks out the high frequency components emphasize low frequency components (TRENDS) May Jun Jul Month Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

53 00 90 Different Data Smoothing Strategies Data Smoothing Ex. Weight Run. mean () Run. mean (2) o F , 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, 50 34, 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, 52, 42, 34, 44, 34, 22, 35, Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Month Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

54 0 Lutzomyia shannoni collected in light traps, Fairfax, VA, 2005 Data 8 Smoothing Flies per trap 25, 35, 44, 24, 36, 34, 42, 52, 44, 34, , 25, 44, 36, 24, 35, , 42, 34, , 32 EPI Week 34, 33 22, 35, The running mean (2) or moving average 5 Lutzomyia shannoni collected in light traps, Fairfax, VA, 2005 SUM(x k : x k-n ) y k = n n = Flies per trap EPI Week

55 Conclusions It blocks out the high frequency components It emphasizes the low frequency components emphasizing longer trends Shows trends more clearly Use carefully

56 Vector Index (VI) Indice Vector Vectorial Index i species NiPˆ i Roger Nasci, CDC

57 Vector Index (VI) Estimate of the number of infected mosquitoes collected per trap night In a meaningful spatial and temporal sampling unit Summed for key mosquito species Quantitatively related to human risk (cases)

58 VI uses data from existing mosquito-based surveillance Vector Index i species Ni Pˆ i Parameter Information provided Units Population Density N i Infection Rate Pˆ Species i Relative abundance of species in terms of trapping effort Incidence of the disease agent in the vector population Key vector or indicator species Number collected per trap night Proportion infected

59 VECTOR INDEX (VI). Calculate mosquito density Trap Site Total Average per trap night SD Ae. albopictus Ni Cx. pipiens

60 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 2. Calculate infection rate as proportion (Ae. albopictus) Pools tested for virus Pool Number Species # in pool Positives Ae. albopictus Ae. albopictus Ae. albopictus 50 4 Ae. albopictus Ae. albopictus Ae. albopictus 50 0 Proportion Infected Infection Rate Pˆ i Lower Limit Upper Limit Confidence

61 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 2. Calculate infection rate as proportion (Cx pipiens) Pools tested for virus Pool Number Proportion Infected Infection Rate Pˆ i Species Cx pipiens Cx pipiens Cx pipiens Cx pipiens Cx pipiens Lower Limit Number in pool Upper Limit Positives Confidence 0.95

62 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 3. Calculate individual and combined VI Vector Index Calculation Ae. albopictus Cx. pipiens Avg/trap night i species N ipˆ i Proportion Infected Ni VI (individual species) VI= (Ae. albopictus & Cx. pipiens) 0.40

63 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 3. Calculate individual and combined VI Vector Index Calculation Ae. albopictus Cx. pipiens Avg/trap night i species N ipˆ i Proportion Infected Pˆ i VI (individual species) VI= (Ae. albopictus & Cx. pipiens) 0.40

64 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 3. Calculate individual and combined VI Vector Index Calculation Ae. albopictus Cx. pipiens Avg/trap night i species N ipˆ i Proportion Infected VI (individual species) N ipˆ i VI= (Ae. albopictus & Cx. pipiens) 0.40

65 VECTOR INDEX (VI) 3. Calculate individual and combined VI Vector Index Calculation Ae. albopictus Cx. pipiens Avg/trap night i species N ipˆ i Proportion Infected VI (individual species) VI= (Ae. albopictus & Cx. pipiens) i species N ipˆ i 0.40

66 Vector Density Cases Cx. pipiens+sp Ae. albopictus No./ Trap Night Cases EPI Week 0

67 Infection Rate (Proportion) Cases Cx. pipiens+sp Ae. albopictus Proportion Infected Cases EPI Week 0

68 Vector Index Cases Cx. pipiens+sp Ae. albopictus Combined Vector Index EPI Week Cases

69 VECTOR INDEX (VI) Combine data from epidemic and non-epidemic years, look for significant correlation. Determine if it can predict cases 2, 3, and 4 weeks later.

70 Conclusions Quantifiable association between VI and cases with onset two weeks later VI can be used as a threshold for launching epidemic response (adulticide applications) to stem epidemic transmission. VI can be used as a method to determine maximum tolerable adult densities, as a guide for larval management programs Has to be calculated weekly, seasonal VI is worthless

71 Acknowledgements Dr. Roger Nasci & Dr. Brad Biggerstaff CDC for sharing slides on Vector Index and for the MLE Add-In.

72 25 WNV Infection Rates in Culex Mosquitoes Collected in Gravid Traps, per Week, Fairfax, Va, 2006 Thank You Infection rate per.000 Vector Index MLE MIR MIR - MLE EPI Week Cases Cx. pipiens+sp Ae. albopictus Combined Vector Index EPI Week Cases Flies per trap Lutzomyia shannoni collected in light traps, Fairfax, VA, Sand Flies Data Smoothing EPI Week Human Bait Collection of Lutzomyia Sand Flies in Amazonas State, Brazil, January 3 to 7, 975 Denominator 3-Jan 4-Jan 5-Jan 6-Jan 7-Jan 8-Jan Date