- EN
Table INF-2. Prevalence of HCV antibody among injecting drug users in the EU, Croatia, Turkey and Norway, 2011 or most recent year available (summary table by country)
| Country or region | % Infected (1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Number tested | National samples | Sub-national samples | Study design (2) | Setting/comments (2) (3) (4) (5) | References | |
| Belgium | 2011 | 392 | : | 42.3-81.5 | DT | DTC; serum | 22 ;25; 27 ; 28 |
| Bulgaria | 2011 | 1138 | : | 67.8 | DT | DTC, NSP, LTS, PRI; serum | 7a ; 7b ; 7c ; 7d |
| Czech Republic | 2011 | 2040 | 18.2 | : | DT | NSP; saliva, serum, capillary blood | 27 ; 32 |
| Denmark | 2008 | 223 | 52.5 | : | SP (UAT) | ODD; post mortem blood | 7 |
| Germany | 2011 | 533 | : | 56.0 - 71.6 | SP | LTS; dried blood spots | 38 |
| Estonia | 2010 | 350 | : | 76 | SP | NSP;Serum | 6 |
| Ireland | : | : | : | : | : | : | : |
| Greece | 2011 | 2036 | 62.4-69.4 | 33.3-79.3 | DT ; SP | DTC, LTS, PHL, OHC, PRI, STR, OTH; serum | 1 ; 2 ; 9 ; 18 ; 19 ;20 |
| Spain | : | : | : | : | : | : | : |
| France | 2006 | 362 | : | 41.7 | SP (UAT) | NSP, LTS, STR; saliva | 21 |
| Italy* | 2010 | 74374 | 60.5 | 34.5 - 80.5 | DT | DTC; serum; IDUnk | 47 ; 48a ; 48b; 49;50 |
| Cyprus | 2011 | 152 | 52.6 | : | DT | DTC; serum | 10 ; 11 ; 12 |
| Latvia | 2010/2011 | 623 | : | 50.0-81,5 | SP | PRI, STR; dried blood spots, serum | 14 ; 15 ; 16 ; 19 |
| Lithuania | 2006 | 775 | : | 70.3–89.7 | DT | LTS, HTC; serum, dried blood spots | 5 ; 8 ; 99 |
| Luxembourg | 2005 | 536 | 71.8–90.7 | : | SP | DTC, NSP, LTS, STI, ANT, OHC, PRI; serum | 6 |
| Hungary | 2011 | 1014 | 24.1 | 9.9 - 34.2 | SP ; DT | NSP, DTC, PRI ; dried blood spots, serum | 24 ;25;26 |
| Malta | 2011 | 96 | 34.4 | : | DT | DTC, HTC, PHL, STI, ANT, OHC; serum | 5 ; 7; 8 ; 9 ; 10 |
| Netherlands^^ | 2010/2011 | 71 | : | 50,0 - 67.4 | SP ; DT | DTC; serum | 33; 34 ; 35 ; |
| Austria | 2011 | 689 | 34.2-48.5 | 38.6-69.6 | DT | DTC, LTS, ODD, NSP; serum | 2 ; 5 ; 12 , 13 ; 14 |
| Poland | 2009 | 184 | : | 44.3 - 72.4 | SP | LTS; serum | 12 |
| Portugal*** | 2010/2011 | 1241 | 36.5-79.7 | : | DT ; SP | DTC ; serum, dried blood spots | 29 ; 30 ; 31 ;32 |
| Romania | 2009 | 449 | : | 82.9 | SP (UAT) | STR; dried blood spots | 7 |
| Slovenia | 2011 | 158 | 28.5 | : | DT | DTC; serum | 5 ; 9 ;11 |
| Slovakia | 2011 | 67 | : | 40.3 | SP | DTC; serum | 12 ; 14 ;16 |
| Finland | 2009 | 682 | 60.5 | : | SP (UAT) | NSP; saliva | 6 ; 8 |
| Sweden | 2010 | 149 | : | 55.7 | DT | PRI; serum | 13 |
| United Kingdom | 2011 | 4975 | 43 | 28.7 -53.2 | SP (UAT) | DTC, NSP, LTS; OTH; dried blood spots,saliva | 51 ; 53 ; 56 ; 65;68;69;70;71;72;73 |
| Croatia | 2007-08 | 791 | 44.0 | 27.1 - 65.0 | SP | PRI, DTC, NSP, LTS, PHL, HTC; serum | 1 |
| Turkey | 2011 | 722 | 48.6 | SP (UAT) | DTC; serum | 0 | |
| Norway | 2011 | 4780 | 65 | 63.3 | SP | DTC, NSP, LTS; serum | 16 ; 21 ; 23 ; 25 ; 26 |
Notes:
This summary table gives a global overview of the prevalence of HCV antibody in IDUs in the EU, 2010 or most recent year available. Data for more than one year are combined if they clearly improve generalisability (e.g. national data, out-of-treatment data). Prevalence in this table should not be compared with previous versions to follow changes over time, as inclusion of sources may vary according to data availability. For time trends see Tables Table INF-111, INF-112 and INF-113.
(1) The figures show estimates (or range of estimates) from National and/or sub-national level samples.
(2) Saliva tests for hepatitis C antibodies underestimate prevalence. If test sensitivity is known then figures can be adjusted upwards by dividing prevalence by test sensitivity. Test sensitivity is around 70–90 % in older studies and may be up to 90-95% in some recent studies. Figures have not been adjusted.
DT: Diagnostic testing; SP: Seroprevalence study; SP-UAT: Seroprevalence study with unlinked anonymous testing; RDS: Respondent-driven sampling; SR: Data (partly) based on self reported test results.
(3) Having health problems is one selection criterion for admission to drug treatment in some countries or cities, due to long waiting lists or special programmes for infected IDUs, and this may result in upward bias of prevalence. Prevalence from treatment data should therefore be interpreted in combination with non-treatment data.
(4) § IDUnk = IDU status not known, prevalence in IDUs is likely to be underestimated.
(5) ODD = Overdose Deaths; DEM = Drug Emergencies; DTC = Drug Treatment Centres; NSP = Needle Exchanges; LTS = Low-Threshold Services; PHL = Public Health Laboratories; STI = STI Clinics; ANT = Antenatal Clinics; OHC = Other Hospital or Clinics; PRI = Prisons; ARR = Arrests; GPS = General Practitioners; HTC = HIV Testing Centres; STR = Street; OTH = Other.
** Latvia provided only one study in 2011 in females only. Therefore, data from 2010 are also presented here
^^ A study from 2010 is included too (the 2011 is from Amsterdam and the other from Rotterdam)
***In 2010, data from 2 studies (SP study in DTCs using serum as specimen and DT study in DTCs using serum and DBSs as specimen) were provided and in 2011 data only from one of those were submitted (DT study). However, the estimates from the two studies vary a lot, and so both estimates are provided here to allow for this variation
* Italy provided a national estimate for 2010 only, even though regional data for 2011 were provided for many regions, but not for all (i.e. Liguria and Lombardia). So regional data for 2010 and not for 2011 are presented here as well for comparability reasons. In addition, prevalence for Bolzano was 100% but the sample size was too small (n=1) and this estimate was not taken into account for the above estimations
Sources:
See Table INF-111.
For references see Table INF-0. Bibliographic References-Part A: References for prevalence data