Table 3.
Prevalence of serologic markers for TTI by dual ELISA-reactive status at four Chinese blood centers in 2000 through 2010
| Blood center | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
HBV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yancheng |
0.47 |
0.49 |
0.35 |
0.23 |
0.58 |
0.42 |
0.37 |
0.38 |
0.41 |
0.27 |
0.20 |
0.37§ |
| Nanjing |
0.70 |
0.78 |
0.57 |
0.57 |
0.46 |
0.47 |
0.44 |
0.38 |
0.40 |
0.38 |
0.36 |
0.49§ |
| Guangzhou |
0.85 |
1.23 |
1.05 |
0.95 |
1.01 |
1.07 |
0.92 |
0.72 |
0.81 |
0.88 |
0.90 |
0.93§ |
| Liaoning |
4.97 |
3.35 |
1.58 |
1.28 |
0.86 |
0.56 |
0.52 |
0.87 |
1.11 |
0.37 |
0.30 |
1.18§ |
| Overall |
2.09 |
1.58 |
1.21 |
1.07 |
0.80 |
0.68 |
0.66 |
0.79 |
0.85 |
0.55 |
0.51 |
0.86 |
|
HCV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yancheng |
0.94 |
0.47 |
0.44 |
0.26 |
0.33 |
0.34 |
0.25 |
0.17 |
0.15 |
0.24 |
0.24 |
0.29§ |
| Nanjing |
0.84 |
0.45 |
0.38 |
0.32 |
0.33 |
0.47 |
0.20 |
0.20 |
0.23 |
0.31 |
0.32 |
0.36§ |
| Guangzhou |
0.34 |
0.62 |
0.55 |
0.33 |
0.38 |
0.23 |
0.26 |
0.24 |
0.46 |
0.58 |
0.71 |
0.47§ |
| Liaoning |
2.29 |
1.85 |
1.41 |
1.16 |
1.04 |
0.52 |
0.53 |
0.63 |
0.65 |
1.05 |
0.72 |
0.99§ |
| Overall |
0.76 |
0.75 |
0.70 |
0.50 |
0.47 |
0.33 |
0.29 |
0.30 |
0.42 |
0.59 |
0.56 |
0.51 |
|
HIV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yancheng |
0.32 |
0.36 |
0.13 |
0.10 |
0.33 |
0.28 |
0.11 |
0.16 |
0.13 |
0.10 |
0.11 |
0.18§ |
| Nanjing |
0.02 |
0.01 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.13 |
0.10 |
0.08 |
0.16 |
0.12 |
0.17 |
0.08 |
| Guangzhou |
0.00 |
0.01 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.02§ |
| Liaoning |
0.69 |
0.25 |
0.11 |
0.20 |
0.23 |
0.13 |
0.15 |
0.08 |
0.22 |
0.31 |
0.25 |
0.22§ |
| Overall |
0.13 |
0.06 |
0.04 |
0.06 |
0.09 |
0.08 |
0.06 |
0.06 |
0.09 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.08 |
|
Syphilis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yancheng |
0.65 |
0.75 |
0.48 |
0.83 |
0.88 |
0.75 |
0.63 |
0.60 |
0.69 |
0.69 |
0.70 |
0.70§ |
| Nanjing |
0.30 |
0.36 |
0.37 |
0.40 |
0.36 |
0.47 |
0.35 |
0.25 |
0.33 |
0.30 |
0.44 |
0.36§ |
| Guangzhou |
0.21 |
0.29 |
0.34 |
0.25 |
0.30 |
0.36 |
0.50 |
0.53 |
0.46 |
0.47 |
0.66 |
0.42§ |
| Liaoning |
1.00 |
1.04 |
1.02 |
0.71 |
0.43 |
0.60 |
0.57 |
0.50 |
0.41 |
0.38 |
0.47 |
0.60§ |
| Overall | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.49 | 0.41 | 0.38 | .046 | 0.50 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.63 | 0.47 |
Data are reported as percentages. § p < 0.01, the p value relates to the overall prevalence.