Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The attack rate is the proportion of people who become ill with a disease. These rates are used in the investigation of an acute outbreak of disease to determine what exposures contributed to the illness. It is calculated as the number of people who became ill divided by the number of people at risk for the illness:

None

A case definition must first be developed. Case definitions may be based on a constellation of clinical signs (e.g., fever with vomiting and/or diarrhea) or on serology (e.g., the presence of antibodies to the etiologic agent). Those people who meet the case definition are identified; the number of people who meet the case definition is the numerator of the attack rate. The denominator of the attack rate is the number of people at risk of becoming ill. As the attack rate is used in the investigation of an outbreak, those at risk are the people who had the opportunity to be exposed such as those who attended the same event as those who became ill.

The time over which cases are collected is defined by the specifics of the outbreak: those who develop the symptoms over a set period after an event. The period over which new cases occur can be a clue to the identification of the causative agent.

Those who did or did not get sick are interviewed to determine their exposures, and attack rates for those who were or were not exposed are calculated. It may be impossible to determine the causative exposure from exposure-specific attack rates alone, as many of the subjects will have exposure to multiple potential agents. A relative attack rate must be calculated for each exposure:

None

An Example of Analysis Using Attack Rates

An outbreak of Group A β-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis occurred among prisoners in a jail. Of 690 inmates, 325 were affected. A survey of 314 randomly selected inmates was conducted and a significant association between sore throat and both consumption of egg salad sandwiches and of a beverage was found.

As Table 1 shows, the attack rate among those who ate the egg salad is higher than among those who did not, but the attack rate among those who drank the beverage is also higher than among those who did not drink the beverage. One way to determine which is more likely to have been the vehicle is to examine the relative attack rates. For the beverage, the attack rate for those who drank compared with those who did not is 1.5, while for the egg salad the relative attack rate is 2.1.

A more definitive way to distinguish is to crossclassify the subjects by whether they did or did not eat egg salad and did or did not drink the beverage, as shown in Table 2.

From Table 2, it is clear that whether or not the subjects drank the beverage did not greatly alter the attack rates for those who ate the egg salad (75.6 vs. 80.0) or who did not eat the egg salad (26.4 vs. 25.0), whereas eating the egg salad did increase the attack rate both for those who drank the beverage (26.4 to 80.0) and for those who did not drink the beverage (25.0 to 80.). This table makes it clear that the egg salad was the most likely vehicle for the infection.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading