Tick-borne diseases in Poland: Prevalence and difficulties in diagnostics
More details
Hide details
Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi / Medical University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland (Zakład Mikrobiologii Farmaceutycznej i Diagnostyki Mikrobiologicznej / Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology and Microbiological Diagnostics)
Corresponding author
Marcin Ciszewski   

Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi, Zakład Mikrobiologii Farmaceutycznej i Diagnostyki Mikrobiologicznej, ul. Pomorska 137, 90-235 Łódź
Med Pr 2016;67(1):73–87
The article presents an overview of diagnostics of tick-borne diseases in Poland, which form one of the most prevalent group of occupational illnesses in the Polish area. This is a current issue due to a constantly growing number of tick-borne infections, i.e., Lyme borreliosis, tick-borne encephalitis, tularemia, Q fever, human granulocytic anaplasmosis and babesiosis. The scale of the problem is well illustrated by the latest reports of the Polish National Institute of Public Health – National Institute of Hygiene (NIPH – NIH). The article also covers the taxonomy of vectors of etiological factors, as well as their reservoirs and possible transmission to humans. The highest risk of tick-borne infection is particularly connected with people either resting or working in the forest or meadow surroundings (i.e., foresters, farmers, hunters). The article contains up-to-date data on epidemiology, etiopathogenesis, symptomatology, laboratory medicine and factors affecting the credibility of results according to current recommendations of the Polish Society of Epidemiology and Physicians of Infectious Diseases and the Polish National Chamber of Laboratory Diagnosticians. The presented review focuses on modern laboratory techniques used in difficult diagnostics of tick-borne diseases, mainly diagnostics algorithms, pre-analytical phase (type of biological material) and analytical phase of diagnostics (reference methods, efficacy of different techniques, interfering factors, proper diagnostic procedures). Med Pr 2016;67(1):73–87