- Acknowledgements
- Executive Summary
- 1. Introduction
2. Valuation Methodology- 3. Incidence of Foodborne Illness, Health Care and Lost Productivity
- 4. Health Care Service Costs
- 5. Cost of Surveillance and Control of Foodborne Illness8
- 6. Health Costs Borne by Businesses and Households
- 7. Industry Costs
- 8. Total Annual Cost of Foodborne Illness
Appendix A: Epidemiological Data- A1. Gastroenteritis
- A2. Listeriosis
- A3. Toxoplasmosis
- A4. Hepatitis A
- A5. Haemolytic Uraemic Syndrome
- A6. Irritable Bowel Syndrome
- A7. Guillain-Barré Syndrome
- A8. Reactive Arthritis
- A9. Brief Description of Clinical Features of Non-Gastroenteritis Foodborne Illnesses
- A10. Some Data Issues and Limitations
- A11. Data Sources for Infectious Gastroenteritis, Listeriosis, Toxoplasmosis, Hepatitis A, Haemolytic Uraemic Syndrom, Irritable Bowel Syndrom, Guillain-Barré Syndrome and Reactive Arthitis
- Appendix B: Sources of Data for Costing Health Care Services
- Appendix C: Cost of Foodborne Illness: Results From the Australia New Zealand Food Authority and Applied Economics
- Abbreviations
- References
The Annual Cost of Foodborne Illness in Australia
A5. Haemolytic Uraemic Syndrome
Table A5 Haemolytic uraemic syndrome due to foodborne transmission(a) in Australia in one year. Estimated number of cases, deaths, health care visits, investigations, treatments and time lost
Age group |
No. cases/ year |
No. deaths/ year(b) |
No. hospital admissions/ year(b)(c) |
Mean days in hospital/ patient(b) |
No. visits to GPs/ year(d) |
No. visits to specialists/ year |
No. cases with tests outside hospital/ year(e) |
No. days lost paid work and activities/ year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males and females | ||||||||
| 0–4 years | 7 |
1 |
8 |
19 |
7 |
6 |
84 |
|
| 5–14 years | 4 |
0 |
4 |
12 |
4 |
4 |
50 |
|
| 15–64 years | 5 |
1 |
18 |
13 |
5 |
4 |
168 |
|
| 65 years or over | 1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
32 |
|
| Total(f) rounded | 20 |
3 |
30 |
9 |
45 |
17 |
14 |
290 |
| (CrI)(g) | (0–40) |
|||||||
| Source of data | APSU for <15 years1994-2000 (APSU 2004). |
APSU 1994–2000 (APSU 2004); state NDSSs for >15 years 1999-2003. |
NHMD 1998-99 to 2000-01. Principal diagnosis. |
NHMD 1998-99 to 2000-01. |
Assumed 3 per case. |
Assumed 1 per case. |
Assumed 2 per case. See details in text. |
Assumed hospital stay + 14 days. |
(a) The proportion of cases due to foodborne transmission was estimated at 50% (95% CrI: 0-100%).
(b) Where HUS was the principal reason for hospital admission. Does not include HUS coded as an additional diagnosis.
(c) Cases can have more than one admission due to hospital transfer.
(d) Assume one visit before admission (although could be a visit to a hospital emergency department) and two after discharge.
(e) Possible ongoing cases with significant renal or other problems are not considered.
(f) Totals may not add due to rounding.
(g) The numbers in brackets indicate the credible interval based on the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the plausible range. Interpretation is akin to 95% CI (see text).
Follow-up management of HUS after hospitalisation
The following tests were assumed to have been done twice after discharge: blood urea, creatinine, electrolytes, full blood count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, microbiological testing and culture of urine.A few patients may have ongoing complications such as renal impairment and would need ongoing specialist care and possibly significant intervention. This has not been costed.
Page currency, Latest update: 27 October, 2006