Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T23:01:22.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of the serological types of haemolytic streptococci in relation to the epidemiology of scarlatina and other infections due to these organisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

H. L. de Waal  and
H.
H. L. de Waal
Affiliation:
From the Department of Bacteriology, University of Edinburgh
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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.

1. The paper records the result of a study of the serological types of haemolytic streptococci in scarlatina, puerperal fever, erysipelas, ear infections, tonsillitis, erythemas, etc., and normal throats, and their epidemiological relationships.

2. Tables and charts are given showing statistical records of scarlatinal cases which occurred over a period of 16 months in Edinburgh, a city with a population of about half a million inhabitants. In all there were 2287 cases. Of these 2169 were treated in an infectious diseases hospital, and were thus readily accessible for investigation. 1364 of the cases were school children. The strains of haemolytic streptococci from 1664 of the hospital-treated cases were serologically examined.

3. During an epidemic of scarlatina certain schools practically escaped, but in these there was a proportionately greater number of cases the following year, as compared with those schools which had suffered heavily the previous season.

4. Depending on the types of haemolytic fltreptococci isolated, scarlatina patients have been divided into three main categories: (1) pupils or school children, (2) “pupil-contacts” (families of pupils), and (3) “non-pupil-contacts” (famines without children of school age). The types of haemolytic streptococci found in these three groups have been correlated. There was a similarity in the types found in pupils and “pupil-contacts”, but not in those of pupils and “non-pupil-contacts”. Those types obtained from “pupil-contacts” and “non-pupil-contacts” were related. These features have been discussed.

5. Certain types of haemolytic streptococci predominated in the pupil cases. These were for the most part the epidemic types. The non-epidemic types, sporadic in appearance, were found mostly in “non-pupil-contacts”. “Pupil-contacts” occupied an intermediate position.

6. One main epidemic type ran through the three classes of patients. It was later replaced by another type.

7. The majority of cases of scarlatina which occurred in a school at a particular time were due to one type. It tended to persist despite the sporadic occurrence of other types. On occasions two types were present concurrently, but usually the one disappeared, and afterwards the other produced most of the cases.

8. The types of haemolytic streptococci in scarlatina, erysipelas, otitis media and mastoiditis, tonsillitis, and other streptococcal infections have been compared and the findings discussed. For the most part there was a correlation of types among all these conditions, and these types appeared to be responsible for a single epidemic of streptococcal infections.

9. The major epidemic types found simultaneously in the City of Edinburgh and in a small community, 12 miles distant, differed.

10. The types of haemolytic streptococci isolated from the throats of nurses in a general hospital bore little relationship to those isolated from medical officers and nurses in an infectious diseases hospital. The common epidemic types were present in the latter.

11. Correlations were shown to exist between the types of haemolytic streptococci in scarlatina patients, and those isolated from various members of their families, in 50% of the occasions in which the organisms were found.

12. The rapid change in the types occurring in the nasopharynx and the problem of immunity have been investigated and discussed in the case of a person exposed to massive infections with haemolytic streptococci.

13. Haemolytic streptococci on the handkerchiefs of scarlatina patients were viable after 4 weeks in most cases and after 7 weeks in two cases. After 15 weeks they were all dead.

14. Haemolytic streptococci were isolated from toys and fruit taken from scarlatina patients.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 1941 , pp. 65 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1941

References

REFERENCES

Bailey, J. H. (1939). Types of hemolytic streptococci found in scarlet fever patients and in throats of grammar-school children. Amer. J. Hyg. Sect. B, 29, 107–18.Google Scholar
Bliss, W. P. (1920). A biological study of hemolytic streptococci from throats of patients suffering from scarlet fever; a preliminary report. Johns Hopk. Hosp. Bull. 31, 173–6.Google Scholar
Bradley, W. H. (1937). Epidemiology of streptococcal infections. Guy's Hosp. Rep. 87, 372–90.Google Scholar
Bradley, W. H. (1938). Spread of streptococcal disease. Brit. med. J. 2, 733–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, H. M. & Hill, A. M. (1940). Haemolytic streptococcal infections following childbirth and abortion: determination of virulence of group A strains. Med. J. Aust. 1, 222–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, M. J. & Neisser, H. (1937). Serological types of Streptococcus pyogenes in scarlet fever. Ann. Bep. Lond. County Coun. 4, pt. 3, 104–7.Google Scholar
Diddle, A. W., Trussell, R. E. & Plass, E. D. (1940). Scarlet fever in obstetrics; a report of an epidemic. Amer. J. Obstet. Oynec. 39, 608–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dochez, A. B., Avery, O. T. & Lancefield, B. C. (1919). Studies on the biology of streptococcus. I. Antigenic relationships between strains of Streptococcus haemolyticus. J. exp. Med. 30, 179–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, M. H. (1921). A serological study of haemolytic streptococci. Brit. med. J. 1, 632–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, J. E., Badger, G. F., Darling, G. B. & Schooten, S. S. (1935). Reaction of familial contacts to scarlet fever infection. Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 25, 531–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, C. A. (1937). Serological types of haemolytic streptococci in an epidemic of scarlatina. J. Hyg., Camb., 37, 318–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, F. (1926). Types of haemolytic streptococci in relation to scarlet fever. J. Hyg., Camb., 25, 385–97.Google ScholarPubMed
Griffith, F. (1927). Types of haemolytic streptococci in relation to scarlet fever. J. Hyg., Camb., 26, 363–73.Google ScholarPubMed
Griffith, F. (1934). The serological classification of Streptococcus pyogenes. J. Hyg., Camb., 34, 542–84.Google ScholarPubMed
Gunn, W. & Griffith, F. (1928). Bacteriological and clinical study of 100 cases of scarlet fever. J. Hyg., Camb., 28, 250–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keogh, E. V., Macdonald, I., Battle, J., Simmons, R. T. & Puckey, M. C. (1939). Serological types of streptococci associated with scarlet fever in Adelaide. Med. J. Aust. 1, 792–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keogh, E. V., Macdonald, I., Battle, J., Simmons, R. T. & Williams, S. (1939). Some factors influencing the spread of scarlet fever in an institution. J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 664–73.Google ScholarPubMed
Kodama, T., Ozaki, M., Nisiyama, S., Igarasi, J., Tiku, Y. & Kawamura, H. (1939). Serological grouping and typing of haemolytic streptococci isolated in Tokyo. Kitasato Arch. 16, 110–33.Google Scholar
Lancefield, R. C. (1928). Antigenic complex of Streptococcus hemolyticus, etc. J. exp. Med. 47, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancefield, R. C. (1933). Serological difierentiation of human and other groups of hemolytic streptococci. J. exp. Med. 57, 571–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclachlan, D. G. S. & Mackie, T. J. (1928). Serological study of haemolytic streptococci associated with scarlatina. J. Hyg., Camb., 27, 225–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, F. (1902). Disch. med. Wschr. 28, 751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, M. & Pirquet, V. (1902). Wien. Klin. Wschr. 15, 1086.Google Scholar
Neisser, H. (1939). Serological typing of Streptococcus pyogenes and its applications to certain infective conditions. J. Path. Bact. 48, 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauli, B. H. & Coburn, A. F. (1937). Studies on serological typing of Streptococcus hemolyticus. J. exp. Med. 65, 595–612.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramsay, G. H. (1935). Scarlet fever and streptococcal infection. Trans. 4th Ann. Meet. So. Branch Amer. Publ. Hlth Ass. (St Louis), Nov. pp. 24–31.Google Scholar
Rossiwall, E. & Schick, B. (1905). Ueber spezifische agglutination von streptokokken aus scharlachanginen und extrabukkalem primäraffekt. Wien. klin. Wschr. 18, 3–7.Google Scholar
Smith, J. (1926). The serological classification of haemolytic streptococci obtained from cases of scarlet fever. J. Hyg., Camb., 25, 165–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, J. (1927). Further studies on the serological classification of haemolytic streptococci. J. Hyg., Camb., 26, 420–33.Google ScholarPubMed
Stebbins, E. L., Ingraham, H. S. & Reed, E. A. (1937). Milk-borne streptococcic infections. Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 27, 1259–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, F. A. & Dochez, A. R. (1926). Occurrence of throat infections with Streptococcus scarlatinas without a rash. J. Amer. med. Ass. 86, 1110–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swift, H. F., Lancefield, R. C. & Goodner, K. (1935). Serological classification of hemolytic streptococci in relation to epidemiologic problems. Amer. J. med. Sci. 190, 445–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tunnicliff, Ruth (1920). Specific nature of the hemolytic streptococcus of scarlet fever. J. Amer. med. Ass. 74, 1386–8.Google Scholar
de Waal, H. L. (1940). Serological types of haemolytic streptococci in relation to the epidemiology of scarlet fever and its complications. J. Hyg., Camb., 40, 172–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C., Rudd, G. V. & Ward, H. K. (1939). Serological types of haemolytic streptococci causing scarlet fever in Sydney. Med. J. Aust. 1, 96–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, A. W., Hussey, H. D. & Banzhaf, E. J. (1924). Culture filtrates of hemolytic streptococci from scarlet fever: intracutaneous reactions in test animals. Proc. Soc. exp. BM..N.Y., 21, 291–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar