Country |
Year |
Number tested |
% positive HBsAg (1) |
% positive any marker (1) |
Setting/comments (2) (3) (4) (5) |
Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Belgium |
2003 |
362 |
(3.9) |
(12.0-61.9) |
DTC, LTS; serum |
2a, 2b, 8 |
Denmark |
1997 |
602 |
|
(64-68) |
PRI, DTC; serum |
1, 2 |
Germany |
1999 |
140 |
2.0 |
(52-63) |
DTC |
4 |
Estonia |
2002 |
100 |
|
(59.5-68.2) |
LTS |
3 |
Greece |
2003 |
2040 |
2.3-5.8 (0.0-7.1) |
|
DTC, LTS, OHC, PHL; serum |
1, 2, 9 |
Spain |
2002-2003 |
805 |
|
(20.0-51.7) |
DTC |
29, 32 |
Ireland |
1998-99 |
682 |
|
17.9-18.5 |
PRI, serum, saliva |
2, 4 |
Italy |
2003 |
62249 |
|
43.4 (26.3-90.6) |
DTC, PRI; serum; IDUnk |
1a, 1b |
Latvia |
2001 |
261 |
|
(38) |
NSP |
2 |
Lithuania |
2000 |
698 |
|
7 |
|
2 |
Hungary |
2002-2003 |
470 |
0.7 (2.6) |
|
DTC, PHL, STR; serum, saliva |
1, 2 |
Netherlands |
1999-00 |
405 |
(3.0-4.4) |
(35.2-67.5) |
DTC, NSP, LTS surveys in and outside drug treatment; serum |
6, 9, 11 |
Austria |
2003 |
214 |
|
(7.0-34.0) |
DTC, LTS, PHL, GPs, HTC; serum |
2, 3, 4, 5 |
Poland |
2002 |
164 |
(5.6) |
(52.4) |
DTC, STR, serum |
2 |
Portugal |
2003 |
8110 |
3.0-8.0 |
16.0-33.0 |
DTC; serum, dried blood spots; IDUnk |
10a, 22 |
Slovenia |
2002-2003 |
670 |
3.4 |
10.4 |
DTC; serum |
1 |
Slovakia |
2002 |
80 |
|
(6.3) |
DTC; serum |
2 |
Sweden |
1997 |
184 |
|
57.6 |
PRI, 9 sites; saliva |
5a, 5b |
United Kingdom (E & W) |
2003 |
2644 |
|
(2.0-29.0) |
DTC, NSP, LTS, primary care and outreach; saliva |
20 |
Bulgaria |
2001 |
689 |
(5) |
n.a. |
DTC, NSP, LTS, outreach. |
1a |
Romania |
2000 |
1200 |
(25) |
|
DTC |
1 |
Norway |
2004 |
264 |
|
(42.0) |
NSP, STR; serum |
2a, 2b |
Notes: This summary table intends to give a global overview of prevalence of HBV markers in IDUs in the EU. In this table data are reported for the most recent year available. Data sources for more than one year are used 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 INF-14 to 15] in the annex of this statistical bulletin. (1) The figures given in brackets show local estimates (or range of estimates) within the country. (2) Saliva tests for hepatitis B antibodies underestimate prevalence. If test sensitivity is known then figures can be adjusted upwards by dividing prevalence by test sensitivity. Figures have not been adjusted. (3) Having health problems is one selection criterion for admission to drug treatment in some countries or cities (Greece, Portugal, Rome), 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. On the other hand, data from Italy and Portugal include non-IDUs and may thus underestimate prevalence in IDUs. (4) IDUnk = IDU not known, prevalence may be too low. (5) DTC = drug treatment centres; NSP = needle exchanges; LTS = low-threshold services; PHL = public health laboratories; OHC = other hospital or clinics; PRI = prisons; GPs = general practitioners; HTC = HIV testing centres; STR = street; OTH = other. Sources: | ||||||