Evaluation of epidemiological and clinical features of influenza and other respiratory viruses.

AIM: In our study, we aimed to clinically and epidemiologically evaluate respiratory tract infections the viral agents of which were detected by molecular methods and to compare influenza and other respiratory tract viruses in this context.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

The records of 178 patients aged above 2 years who presented to pediatric emergency outpatient clinic with fever and respiratory tract infection findings between December 2013 and April 2014 were examined retrospectively.

RESULTS

At least one respiratory tract pathogen was detected by polymerase chain reaction in 78.6% (n=140) of the patients: influenza A 33.5%, influenza B 16.4%, respiratory syncytial virus 9.2%, adenovirus 7.8%, rhinovirus 7.1%, coronavirus 7.1%, human metapneumovirus 5.7%, human bocavirus 5.7%, parainfluenza virus 3.5%, coinfection 2.8%. The mean age of the patients was 6.3±3.6 years. Sixty-nine patients (49.2%) were aged between 2 and 5 years. Seventy-one patients (50.7%) were aged 5 years and above. Upper respiratory tract infection was found with a rate of 65.7% and lower respiratory tract infection was found with a rate of 34.2%. It was observed that the distribution of respiratory tract viruses showed variance by age groups. Influenza A infection was observed with the highest rate in both age groups. Influenza B was the second leading agent (p=0.008) above the age of 5 years and respiratory syncytial virus was the second leading agent in the 2-5 year age group (p=0.003). Influenza viruses were detected in 55.9% of 118 patients who were found to be compatible with the definition of "influenza-like illness" specified in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines and other viral agenst were detected in 44%. No difference could be found between the clinical pictures and radiological findings caused by influenza and other respiratory tract viruses.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, it was concluded that influenza and other respiratory viruses can not be differentiated definitely by clinical and radiological findings, though there are some differences.