Mumps

Signs and Fever, headache, muscle aches, tiredness, hearing loss, loss of appetite, often followed by parotitis
Symptoms (swelling of salivary glands). After puberty, can cause painful, swollen testicles (males) or ovaries
(females). Other presentations: Aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, pancreatitis. Can be asymptomatic.
Incubation Usually 16-18 days after exposure (range 12-25 days).
Case Clinical definition: Acute parotitis or other salivary gland swelling lasting at least 2 days, or orchitis
classification (testicular swelling) or oophoritis (swelling of ovary) unexplained by another more likely diagnosis.
Confirmed case: meets clinical Probable case: meets clinical Suspected case: Parotitis, acute
definition or other acute definition, AND positive test for salivary gland swelling, orchitis,
illness characterized as aseptic serum anti-mumps IgM antibody, or oophoritis unexplained by
meningitis, encephalitis, OR epi-linked to another probable another more likely diagnosis,
hearing loss, or pancreatitis or confirmed case or linkage to a OR positive lab result with no
AND confirmed by mumps community (defined by public mumps clinical symptoms (with
PCR or culture. health) during a mumps outbreak. or without epi-link).
Differential EBV, HHV-6, cytomegalovirus, parainfluenza virus 1 & 3, influenza A, coxsackie, tumors, immunologic
diagnosis disease, salivary duct obstruction. Important for sporadic cases of parotitis with no high-risk exposure.
Treatment Supportive therapy
Laboratory Buccal and urine for RT-PCR: PHL performs this test; most commercial labs do not perform mumps PCR
or culture. Mumps can be most reliably diagnosed by isolation of mumps virus or detection of mumps
nucleic acid by PCR assay from buccal mucosa secretions.
• Days 0-3 after parotitis onset (onset date is day 0): Collect buccal swab only. (IDEAL)
• Days 4-10 after parotitis onset: Collect both buccal swab AND urine specimen.
Place buccal swab in VTM, urine in sterile screw-capped container. Bag specimens separately.
Serum for mumps IgM and IgG antibody detection: In general, serum can be sent commercially;
request both IgM & IgG. Please note: Follow up to determine IgG results will be important for patients
with unknown vaccination status, since a negative PCR cannot rule out mumps on a person previously
exposed to mumps antigen, either by vaccination or previous infection. If unvaccinated: collect at first
clinical encounter; If IgM negative within 5d of onset, collect another specimen to rule in/out. IgM
reliably present >5d post-onset. If vaccinated: take acute specimen at 1st clinical encounter; IgM may
not be detectable in vaccinated persons with mumps regardless of collection timing.
Keep specimens cold & ship on ice within 24h; if >72h, freeze buccal & urine to -70°C, ship on dry ice.
Public • Assess the likelihood of mumps: confirm compatible clinical symptoms, verify vaccination and travel
Health history, and assess exposure risk such as contact with a person with mumps or linkage to a
investigation community with a mumps outbreak.
• Collect specimens as soon as mumps is suspected; arrange testing at PHL as appropriate.
• Recommend immediate isolation of case (droplet precautions) for 5 days after parotitis onset.
• Recommend appropriate infection control precautions to prevent additional exposures in
healthcare facilities, schools, workplaces, and other public settings.
• Identify close contacts of all suspected cases to assess their immune status.
o Refer symptomatic contacts for evaluation by HCP and exclude from school, work, & child care.
o Refer susceptible contacts and contacts w only 1 MMR dose or an unknown vaccination history
for one dose of MMR vaccine. (All may return to school after a dose has been received)
o Recommend that exposed persons with 1 MMR receive a 2nd dose (>28d after date of 1st dose).
• Educate potentially exposed contacts to watch for symptoms for 12 days after the first exposure
through 25 days after last exposure and seek immediate evaluation if symptoms occur.
• If in health care setting, exclude exposed HCWs without documented immunity (2 MMRs) from the
12th day after the first exposure through the 25th day after last exposure.
• Provide appropriate notifications to childcare centers, schools, and care facilities.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 1 of 18 DOH # 420-065
 Mumps
1. DISEASE REPORTING
A. Purpose of Reporting and Surveillance
1. To assess the burden of mumps in Washington.
2. To identify cases in order to prevent further spread from cases by recommending
appropriate preventive measures, including exclusion.
3. To educate potentially exposed individuals about signs and symptoms of disease, thereby
facilitating early diagnosis and reducing the risk of further transmission.
4. To identify and vaccinate susceptible individuals.
B. Legal Reporting Requirements
1. Health care providers: notifiable to local health jurisdiction within 24 hours.
2. Health care facilities: notifiable to local health jurisdiction within 24 hours.
3. Laboratories: Mumps virus, acute, by IgM positivity or PCR positivity notifiable to local
health jurisdiction within 24 hours; specimen submission of isolate or clinical specimen
associated with positive result is required* (2 business days).
*In practice, submission of these specimens generally occurs only upon request rather than routinely.

4. Local health jurisdictions: notifiable to the Washington State Department of Health

(DOH) Communicable Disease Epidemiology (CDE) within 7 days of case investigation
completion or summary information required within 21 days.
C. Local Health Jurisdiction Investigation Responsibilities
1. Begin routine case investigation within one working day.
2. Facilitate the transport of specimens to assist with the diagnosis of cases.
3. Recommend measures to prevent further spread from the case.
4. Identify and evaluate contacts; educate and recommend measures to prevent further
spread from susceptible contacts.
5. Report all confirmed and probable cases as well as suspected cases with possible
exposure to mumps to Communicable Disease Epidemiology (see Section 3).
6. Complete the mumps case report form
(https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/5100/210-039-ReportForm-Mumps.pdf)
and enter the data into the Washington Disease Reporting System (WDRS).
2. THE DISEASE AND ITS EPIDEMIOLOGY
A. Etiologic Agent
Mumps is caused by a single-stranded RNA paramyxovirus.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 2 of 18 DOH # 420-065
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

B. Description of Illness
The classic symptom of mumps is parotitis (i.e., acute onset of unilateral or bilateral tender,
self-limited swelling of the parotid or other salivary glands), lasting at least two days, but
may persist up to ten days or longer. Nonspecific prodromal symptoms may precede parotitis
by several days, including low-grade fever which may last three to four days, myalgia,
anorexia, malaise, and headache. However, mumps infection may present only with
nonspecific or symptoms or may be a subclinical infection. Rates of classic parotitis among
all age groups typically range from 31% to 65%, but in specific age groups can be as low as
9% or as high as 94% depending on the ages and immunization histories of the individuals in
the group. Parotitis may be unilateral or bilateral, and any combination of single or multiple
salivary glands may be affected. Parotitis tends to occur within the first 2 days and may first
be noted as earache and tenderness on palpation of the angle of the jaw. Symptoms tend to
decrease after one week and usually resolve after 10 days.
Persons with history of potential exposure to mumps who have pain in their testes (males) or
pelvic area (females) should be evaluated by their health care provider for potential orchitis
(testicular inflammation) or oophoritis (ovarian inflammation not related to bacterial
infection).
Before the introduction of the mumps vaccine in the United States in 1967, 15% to 27% of
infections were asymptomatic. The proportion of infections that are asymptomatic since the
introduction of the vaccine has not been clearly determined. Persons with asymptomatic
infection can transmit the virus.
Mumps complications
• Orchitis (testicular inflammation) is the most common complication of mumps in
post-pubertal males. In the pre-vaccine era, orchitis was reported in 12 – 66% of
males who get mumps after puberty. Orchitis usually occurs 1-2 weeks (average 4-8
days) after onset of parotitis. In mumps-associated orchitis, the onset is usually abrupt
and includes swelling, tenderness, nausea, vomiting, and fever. Only one testicle is
affected in 60-83% of male mumps cases with orchitis. Mumps orchitis rarely leads to
sterility but it may contribute to subfertility. An estimated 1 in 10 men experience a
decrease in their sperm count. However, this drop is very rarely large enough to cause
infertility.
• Oophritis. Historically, about one in 20 females who got mumps after puberty
experienced swelling of the ovaries or oophritis (ovarian inflammation). In the 2006
and 2009–2010 U.S. mumps outbreaks, oophoritis rates were 1% or lower among
post-pubertal females. The symptoms of oophoritis (lower abdominal pain, high
temperature, feeling sick) usually pass once the underlying mumps infection is
cleared. It may mimic appendicitis. There is no known relationship to impaired
fertility.
• Asceptic meningitis. In the pre-vaccine era, mumps accounted for approximately
10% of cases of symptomatic aseptic meningitis (inflammatory cells in cerebrospinal
fluid resulting in headache or stiff neck). Men were afflicted three times as often as
women. Aseptic meningitis resolves without sequelae in 3 to 10 days.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 3 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

• Mumps encephalitis accounted for 36% of all reported encephalitis cases in the
United States in 1967. The incidence of mumps encephalitis is reported to range from
1 in 6,000 mumps cases (0.02%) to 1 in 300 mumps cases (0.3%).
• Mastitis has been reported in up to 31% of females older than 15 years of age who
have mumps.
• Pancreatitis was reported in 3.5% of persons infected with mumps in one community
during a two year period prior to the availability of vaccine, and was also described in
case reports. Pancreatitis is infrequent, but occasionally occurs without parotitis. It
causes hyperglycemia that is transient and reversible. Although single instances of
diabetes mellitus have been reported, a causal relationship with mumps virus
infection has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.
• Deafness. In the pre-vaccine era, mumps caused transient deafness in 4.1% of
infected adult males (in a military population). Permanent unilateral deafness caused
by mumps occurred in 1 of 20,000 infected persons. Bilateral, severe hearing loss was
very rare.
In the post-vaccine era, among all persons infected with mumps, reported rates of meningitis,
encephalitis, pancreatitis, and deafness have all been less than 1%. Permanent sequelae such
as paralysis, seizures, cranial nerve palsies, and hydrocephalus occurred very rarely, even in
the pre-vaccine era. Although, in the United States during 1966–1971 there were two deaths
per 10,000 reported mumps cases, there were no mumps-related deaths in recent U.S.
outbreaks.
Although mumps virus is the only agent known to cause epidemic parotitis, not all cases of
parotitis are caused by mumps virus. Sporadic parotitis can also occur as a result of infection
with other viral pathogens such as enteroviruses (including coxsackievirus), parvovirus B-19,
adenoviruses, parainfluenza virus (PIV) types 1 – 3, influenza A and B, human herpesviruses
6 (HHV-6), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and bocavirus (HBoV)* as well as infection with
Staphylococcus aureus and other bacteria. Additionally, non-infectious causes of parotitis
include drugs, tumors, immunologic diseases, and obstruction of the salivary duct. Current
mumps diagnostics do not satisfactorily identify cases in previously vaccinated people; thus,
a negative laboratory test result for mumps cannot rule out the disease in these individuals.
Also, testing for alternative causes of parotitis is not routinely done unless symptoms or
history suggest alternate diagnosis. Because of this, most mumps antibody–negative cases of
parotitis in persons previously exposed to mumps either by vaccination or by having the
disease, especially when symptoms last two days or more, must still be considered as
suspected mumps.
*Viruses Detected Among Sporadic Cases of Parotitis, United States, 2009-2011. Barsky, et. al., The Journal of Infectious Diseases
2013;208:1979–86.

C. Mumps in Washington State

During 1998–2005, DOH received between 0 and 11 reports of mumps infections per year. A
large outbreak of mumps originating in the Midwest in December 2005 spread to nine other
states during 2006. Because of increased awareness of mumps during 2006, DOH received
over 150 reports of possible mumps. Molecular testing for mumps – polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) and serologic assay – was initiated at Washington State Public Health

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 4 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

Laboratories (PHL) during 2006. In October 2006, CDC requested that a strict interpretation
of the case definition be used (MMWR 2006;55(42):1152–53) which included reporting any
previously immunized person with 2 or more days of parotitis as a probable case. Using these
guidelines, 42 reports of confirmed and probable mumps were identified in 2006, though
none were linked to the outbreak in the Midwest; 53 cases were reported in 2007.
Annual case counts in Washington dropped when another change in national reporting
criteria was made in 2008: persons who met the clinical case definition or had clinically
compatible disease, but who lacked either laboratory confirmation or epidemiologic link to a
case, were now to be considered suspect rather than probable cases and therefore were not
included in the annual case counts. Based on these criteria, DOH received 35 reports of
confirmed and probable mumps (range 0 – 14 per year) and 105 reports of suspected mumps
(range 10 – 33 per year) during 2008-2013.
The national mumps case definition changed again in 2012 making anyone with 2 days of
parotitis and a positive IgM a probable case. Washington State did not fully implement this
change until January, 2017 following a mumps outbreak in highly vaccinated persons that
began in late 2016*.
* In Washington State, persons with 2 documented doses of mumps vaccine that were reported to have 2 days of parotitis
and a positive IgM with no other testing were classified as suspect cases from 2012 through 2016.

D. Reservoir
Humans are the only known reservoir.
E. Modes of Transmission
Transmission occurs through respiratory droplets or through direct contact with
nasopharyngeal secretions.
F. Incubation Period
The incubation period is usually 16–18 days, but can range from 12–25 days after exposure.
G. Period of Communicability
Mumps virus has been found in respiratory secretions as early as 7 days before the start of
symptoms and up to 9 days after onset. However, the patient is most infectious within the
first 5 days. Therefore, CDC now recommends isolating mumps patients for 5 days following
onset of symptoms (parotitis) (MMWR 2008;57 [No.40]:1103–4). The recommended
period for contact tracing for mumps is two days before through five days after
parotitis onset in the case.
H. Treatment
Treatment is supportive.
I. Immunity
In general, immunity is considered lifelong and develops after either clinical or inapparent
infections. Most adults that were born before 1957 are likely to have been infected naturally
and may be considered to be immune, even if they did not have recognized disease. Recent
evidence suggests that persons previously exposed to the virus through either vaccination or
disease may still become infected. In response to the multistate mumps outbreak in 2006,

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 5 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

ACIP recommendations for prevention and control of mumps were updated. Evidence of
immunity through documentation of vaccination is now defined as:
• 1 dose of live mumps vaccine for preschool-aged children and for adults not at high
risk for exposure and infection, and
• 2 doses of live mumps vaccine for school-aged children (i.e., grades K–12) and for
adults at high risk for exposure and infection (i.e., health-care workers, international
travelers, and students at post-high-school education institutions)
See MMWR 2006;55(22):629–30.
3. CASE AND CONTACT DEFINITIONS
A. Case Definition (2012)
Suspected: Parotitis, acute salivary gland swelling, orchitis, or oophoritis unexplained by
another more likely diagnosis,
OR
A positive lab result with no mumps clinical symptoms (with or without epidemiological-
linkage to a confirmed or probable case).
Probable: Acute parotitis or other salivary gland swelling lasting at least 2 days, or orchitis
or oophoritis unexplained by another more likely diagnosis, in:
A person with a positive test for serum anti-mumps immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody,
OR
A person with epidemiologic linkage to another probable or confirmed case or linkage to
a group/community defined by public health during an outbreak of mumps.
Confirmed: A positive mumps laboratory confirmation for mumps virus with reverse
transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or culture in a patient with an acute illness
characterized by any of the following:
• Acute parotitis or other salivary gland swelling, lasting at least 2 days
• Aseptic meningitis
• Encephalitis
• Hearing loss
• Orchitis
• Oophoritis
• Mastitis
• Pancreatitis

Comment
As a result of previous contact with mumps virus either through vaccination (particularly
with 2 doses) or natural infection, mumps serologic IgM test results may be negative even
when the person is infected; IgG test results may be positive at initial blood draw and viral
detection in RT-PCR or culture may have low yield. Therefore, mumps cases in persons
previously exposed to mumps antigen cannot be ruled out by negative laboratory

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 6 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

results. Serologic tests should be interpreted with caution, as false positive and false negative
results are possible with IgM tests.
Reported mumps cases in WA State should be assigned case classifications based on mumps
laboratory test results as follows:
Laboratory Test Result: Case Classification:
Isolation of mumps virus from clinical specimen Confirmed
Detection of mumps nucleic acid (e.g. real time RT-PCR Confirmed
assay)
Detection of mumps IgM antibody
-when result has been confirmed by mumps capture Confirmed
assay done at CDC

-when the test is performed at a commercial lab Probable

AND
the specimen cannot be retrieved for further testing

-when the test lab was performed at PHL using an Probable

indirect EIA assay and no additional testing is done
Demonstration of seroconversion (in the absence of recent Confirmed
vaccination) from negative to positive using a standard
serologic assay for mumps-specific IgG antibody in paired
acute and convalescent serum specimens.
B. Close Contacts (of a person with mumps)
Mumps spreads by direct contact with infectious respiratory secretions by droplet
transmission. Such droplets generally travel 3 feet or less when an infected person talks,
coughs, or sneezes. The risk of transmission of mumps is a function of multiple factors
including clinical features of the source case as they relate to communicability (e.g., stage of
illness, the presence and character of any respiratory symptoms), proximity and duration of
contact, ventilation, and use of appropriate infection control measures (mask, eye protection).
Examples of close contact that could facilitate the transmission of mumps include:
1. Direct face-to-face contact with a symptomatic case-patient during the contagious period.
This includes household and immediate family members, boyfriends/girlfriends, and child
care contacts (those who spend many hours together or live in the same household).
2. An obvious exposure that involves direct contact with respiratory, oral, or nasal secretions
from a case-patient during the contagious period (e.g., a cough or sneeze in the face, sharing
of eating utensils, sharing of water bottles, kissing, mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, or
performing intubation or nasotracheal suctioning without a mask).
3. Close proximity for a prolonged period of time with a case-patient during the contagious
period. Risk of droplet exposure increases with longer duration and closer proximity of
contact.
Examples of persons who may be at increased risk include:
a. non-household close friends or other social contacts

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 7 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

b. some passengers during shared transportation

c. some contacts at community activities or at the place of employment
d. some healthcare workers caring for a case without wearing a mask
e. children attending an after-school care group or play group on the same days
Note: Close contact does not include activities such as walking by a person or briefly
sitting across a waiting room or office.
4. DIAGNOSIS AND LABORATORY SERVICES
A. Diagnosis
Mumps can most reliably be diagnosed by isolation of mumps virus or detection of mumps
nucleic acid by PCR assay on secretions collected from the buccal mucosa during the first 3
days following onset of parotitis. Buccal swabs are the preferred sample, but mumps virus
may also be detected in urine. Obtaining timely and appropriate specimens for these tests is
highly important, especially when the person has had a high risk exposure or is unvaccinated.
1. Viral culture and detection of mumps nucleic acid by PCR assay: Virus is likely to be
present in the saliva from 2 or 3 days before onset of parotitis until 4-5 days afterward.
The yield is highest from buccal specimens collected within 3 days of onset. Therefore,
buccal specimens should be collected within 3 days if possible, and not more than 5 days
after onset (Mandell, Bennett, & Dolin. Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases,
Sixth Edition, Volume 2; Chapter 154 Mumps Virus, pp 2003-2008.)
Note: During the 2006 mumps outbreak at a U.S. college where most patients had been
vaccinated with 2 doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, a study aimed
at viral identification using reverse transcription--polymerase chain reaction on buccal
specimens from patients with parotitis found that, among 20 patients tested <3 days after
onset of parotitis, mumps viral RNA was detected in seven (35%) whereas in a total of 26
specimens from 14 patients tested from 4--22 days after onset of parotitis all were
negative for mumps viral RNA.(MMWR 2008;57 [No.40]:1103–4)
Although buccal swabs are the preferred specimen, an accompanying urine sample may
be useful if collection of the buccal swab has been delayed. Unlike buccal specimens,
urine samples may not be positive for mumps virus until ≥4 days after symptom onset.
Urine specimens should be collected no later than 10 days after parotitis onset.
Although very specific, viral culture and detection of mumps nucleic acid by PCR are not
highly sensitive tests. Therefore a negative culture and/or PCR assay cannot rule out the
diagnosis of mumps.
2. Serologic testing: A serum sample for both IgM and IgG can be collected at the first
clinical encounter. In unvaccinated cases, IgM is present by day 5 post onset of
symptoms. Therefore, among unvaccinated persons, if an acute IgM is collected less
than 5 days after onset of parotitis and the IgM is negative, mumps cannot be ruled out
and a second serum sample collected at least 5 days after onset is recommended. IgM
peaks at about 1 week and can be present for at least 6 weeks. IgG becomes detectable
shortly after IgM is present.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 8 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

Recent evidence suggests that persons previously exposed to the virus through either
vaccination or disease may still become infected. Elevation of mumps IgM may be
transient or absent in these individuals. Experience suggests that IgM assays from
persons with acute infection may be negative in up to 50% of previously immunized
individuals (i.e., a negative IgM does not rule out infection in a vaccinated person)
(MMWR 2006;55(42):1152-3). In contrast, IgG levels in previously vaccinated
individuals may rise rapidly after exposure or infection. By the time an “acute” sample is
collected, IgG levels may already be quite high, precluding the possibility of detecting a
4-fold rise in a convalescent specimen.
For additional information regarding laboratory testing for mumps infection, see:
https://www.cdc.gov/mumps/lab/index.html.
B. Tests Available at the Washington State Department of Health Public Health
Laboratories (PHL)
PHL will generally perform viral cultures and real time PCR for mumps virus on buccal
swabs and urine specimens from persons suspected to have mumps, once testing has been
approved by the local health jurisdiction. Ideally, buccal swabs should be collected within 3
days of onset of parotitis, and are generally not useful if collected 5 or more days after
parotitis begins. When the buccal specimen collection is delayed beyond 3 days following
onset, an accompanying urine specimen should also be collected (days 4 to 10) and submitted
for testing since mumps virus persists longer in the urine.
In most cases, if serologic testing is desired, serum can be sent commercially and both IgM
and IgG results should be requested. Please note: Follow up to determine IgG results will be
important for patients with unknown vaccination status, since a negative PCR cannot rule out
mumps on a person previously exposed to mumps antigen, either by vaccination or previous
infection.
With any of the commercially available assays for mumps-specific IgM, false positive IgM
results can be a problem. The following caveats should be relayed to the health care provider
whenever possible:
• No test currently available is sensitive enough to rule out mumps in an individual
previously exposed to mumps antigen, either through previous disease or by history
of vaccination.
• Many commercial laboratories do not perform virus detection and isolation for
mumps.
• In general, a positive IgM result obtained at any time during a mumps-like illness
MAY be diagnostic for mumps. However, false positive IgM results can occur,
particularly when testing is being performed in a low prevalence population (i.e.,
people who do not meet the clinical case definition, people with no obvious risk
factors for mumps, and people that have received 2 documented doses of mumps-
containing vaccine.). In such instances, when a positive IgM result is obtained, the
result should be interpreted with caution.
• If the patient is not fully vaccinated or has risk factors for mumps and a positive IgM
result is obtained, further testing will likely be recommended.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 9 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

In some circumstances when public health interventions are contingent upon the confidence
that a case is truly mumps, the local jurisdiction could consider requesting serologic testing at
WA PHL. For example, if viral specimen collection was delayed beyond the recommended
specimen collection times (i.e., if more than 10 days has passed since the onset of parotitis)
in an unimmunized case with high risk exposures, testing could be performed at PHL to
facilitate more rapid turnaround of IgM results, as well as paired IgG serology testing.
Additionally, if a positive IgM is reported by a commercial laboratory, PHL can help assure
accurate results through EIA testing as well as more specific capture IgM testing at CDC. If
serology testing is being considered at PHL, please call DOH Communicable Disease
Epidemiology (CDE) to discuss and make arrangements for testing.
All requests for mumps testing at PHL must have approval from the local health jurisdiction,
in consultation with an epidemiologist in Communicable Disease Epidemiology (CDE) at
877-539-4344 or 206-418-5500.
C. Specimen Collection
Following receipt of approval from the local health jurisdiction and CDE, healthcare
providers should be encouraged to collect the following specimens for submission to
PHL (ideally within 3 days of parotitis onset):
Specimens for PCR (Preferred)
• Collect as soon as mumps is suspected for optimal detection/isolation.
o Days 0-3 after parotitis onset (onset date is day 0): Buccal swab only.
o Days 4-10 after parotitis onset: Buccal swab AND urine specimen.
• Consult CDE for testing options if collection is delayed >10 days after parotitis onset.
• Buccal Swab
o Massage the parotid gland for about 30 seconds prior to collecting specimen.
o Place a Dacron® swab* between rear molars and cheek (on the affected side if
parotitis is unilateral) and leave in place 10–15 seconds.
o Place both swab in a tube containing 2-3 ml of cold viral transport medium
(VTM).**
o Keep cold and ship on cold pack within 24-72 hrs of collection to arrive at WA
PHL during business hours.
 If >72 hrs, freeze at -70ºC and ship on dry ice.
*For swab specimen collection, synthetic swabs are preferred over cotton swabs as
the latter may contain substances that are inhibitory to enzymes used in RT-PCR.
**Cell culture medium (MEM or Hanks Balanced Salt Solution) or other sterile
isotonic solution (phosphate buffered saline) may also be used to stabilize the virus.
Ensure that the cap is securely tight and will not leak. Keep cold after collection
and during shipment.
• Urine Specimen
o Collect a minimum of 10 ml of clean voided urine (50 ml preferred) in a sterile
screw-capped container.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 10 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

o Keep cold and ship on cold pack within 24-72 hrs of collection to arrive at WA
PHL during business hours.
 If >72 hrs, freeze at -70ºC and ship on dry ice.
Serologic testing for mumps:
• In most cases, if serologic testing is desired, serum can be sent commercially and both
IgM and IgG results should be requested. Please note: Follow up to determine IgG
results will be important for patients with unknown vaccination status, since a
negative PCR cannot rule out mumps on a person previously exposed to mumps
antigen, either by vaccination or previous infection.
• Serum
o Collect at least 4ml of blood or 2 ml of serum in a red top or red-gray top tube.
o Keep cold and ship on cold pack within 24-72 hrs of collection
 If >72 hrs, freeze at -20ºC, and ship on dry ice
See PHL test menu for detailed collection and submission instructions:
https://www.doh.wa.gov/ForPublicHealthandHealthcareProviders/PublicHealthLaboratories/
MicrobiologyLabTestMenu
D. Specimen Shipping
All specimens must be accompanied by a PHL “Virus Examination” lab form, with patient
name, additional identifier such as date of birth (which must also be on specimen), submitter
name, date of collection, date of onset of symptoms, symptoms, and vaccination history. The
PHL lab form may be obtained online at
https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/5230/302-017-SerVirHIV.pdf.
Note that PHL requires that all clinical specimens have two patient identifiers, a name and a
second identifier (e.g., date of birth) on both the specimen label and on the submission form.
Due to laboratory accreditation standards, specimens will be rejected for testing if not
properly identified. Also include specimen source and collection date.
Ship the specimen(s) so that they are kept appropriately cool (not frozen) for the type of
delivery (regular or overnight) selected as specific in section 4C.
Health care providers and laboratories should be referred to the Mumps Specimen Shipping
Guide found at https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/Pubs/302-022-
SpecimenShippingGuide.pdf

5. ROUTINE CASE INVESTIGATION

Interview the case and others who might be able to provide pertinent information.
A. Evaluate the Diagnosis
Since parotitis can be caused by many other conditions, review the clinical presentation and
laboratory test results, if available. Facilitate the transport of specimens to Public Health
Laboratories to confirm the diagnosis as needed. Proceed with a public health investigation
for all suspected, probable, and confirmed cases.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 11 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

B. Identify Source of Infection

Attempt to determine if a suspected case was in contact with a known case or had recently
traveled to an area where mumps transmission is being reported or where mumps is endemic.
C. Identify Exposed, Susceptible Close Contacts
Identify persons who had close contact (see Section 3C) with the case during the
communicable period (2 days prior to and 5 days after the onset of parotitis). Determine
whether contacts can be considered immune or should be considered susceptible to mumps
infection. Acceptable presumptive evidence of immunity to mumps includes one of the
following:
• Documentation of adequate vaccination*,
• Laboratory evidence of immunity,
• Birth before 1957, or
• Documentation of physician-diagnosed mumps.
*Evidence of immunity through documentation of adequate vaccination is now defined as
1 dose of a live mumps virus vaccine for preschool-aged children and adults not at high
risk and 2 doses for school-aged children (i.e., grades K–12) and for adults at high risk
(i.e., persons who work in health care facilities, international travelers, and students at
post-high school educational institutions) (MMWR 2006;55(22):629–30).
Documentation of immunization is preferable, but serologic testing for IgG can be
performed for exposed contacts that do not have proof of immunity.
The following are considered evidence of immunity for healthcare workers:
In non-outbreak settings:
• Documented physician-diagnosed mumps,
• Serologic evidence of immunity, or
• Documented receipt of 1 dose of mumps if born before 1957, or 2 doses of mumps
vaccine if born during or after 1957.
During an outbreak, more stringent requirements for evidence of immunity should be used:
• Documented physician-diagnosed mumps,
• Serologic evidence of immunity, or
• Documented receipt of 2 doses of mumps vaccine regardless of birth year.
D. Environmental Evaluation
None
6. CONTROLLING FURTHER SPREAD
A. Infection Control Recommendations
1. Hospitalized patients should be cared for using droplet precautions until the 6th day after
the date of parotitis onset.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 12 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

Note: Available published data (MMWR 2008;57 [No.40]:1103–4) has shown that the
proportion of samples from persons positive for mumps virus decreased from 81% 1 day
after parotitis onset to 49% 2-3 days after onset, 40% 4-5 days after onset, and 17% 6-7
days after onset of parotitis.
2. Cases (including suspected cases) should stay home and not go to school, work, public
places or social activities until 5 full days have passed since the date of parotitis onset.
Family members who are not immune should avoid contact during the time the case is
infectious. Healthcare workers with mumps illness should be excluded from work until
the 6th day after the onset of parotitis, with the date of onset being day 0.
3. Cases should be taught “respiratory etiquette” (see section 8B).
B. Case Management
No further public health actions are required after the above infection control measures have
been implemented.
C. Contact Management
1. Symptomatic Contacts
All close contacts with symptoms compatible with mumps should be referred to a
healthcare provider for assessment and laboratory testing; the healthcare provider should
be made aware of the specific reason for referral.
2. Exclusion
All symptomatic close contacts should be excluded from school, workplace and child
care (regardless of immunization status) until they have been evaluated for possible
mumps.
Exclusion of susceptible students from school settings during mumps outbreaks should be
considered in certain circumstances (e.g., when severe illnesses occur beyond expected
rates, when susceptible students are thought to be a major factor in disease transmission.)
During mumps outbreaks, all susceptible students without a medical contraindication
should be immunized with MMR vaccine, and all symptomatic cases must be excluded
from the school setting and from contact with the public until 5 days after the onset of
parotitis. Parents should be informed of the risk of mumps to both vaccinated and
susceptible students during school outbreaks. Families of children susceptible to mumps,
including children with underlying medical conditions or a medical contraindication to
MMR vaccine, should discuss the risks and benefits of remaining in the school setting
with their healthcare provider.
Note: The following information may be of use when considering exclusion of exposed
susceptible persons:
Although mumps virus was isolated successfully from 7 days before to 8 days after onset
of parotitis, isolation rates were much greater closer to parotitis onset. For seven of the
eight studies with available data on isolation of mumps virus by day relative to onset of
parotitis, combined data showed that the proportion of samples positive for mumps virus
increased from 17% 6-7 days before onset of parotitis to 40% 2-3 days before onset, 86%

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 13 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

1 day before onset, and 78% on the day of parotitis onset. (MMWR 2008;57
[No.40]:1103–4)
Schools:
In the setting of a mumps outbreak in a school, if pupils who are exempted from
immunization for any reason are excluded, the exclusion period should be through 25
days after the last known exposure. Excluded susceptible students who choose to be
vaccinated can be readmitted immediately after immunization.
Healthcare workers exposed to a person with mumps:
Exposed healthcare personnel without acceptable evidence of immunity should be
excluded from the 12th day after the first unprotected exposure to mumps through 25
days after the last exposure. The mumps vaccine cannot be used to reliably prevent
the development of mumps after exposure in high risk environments like healthcare
facilities. Hence, previously unvaccinated healthcare personnel who receive a first
dose of vaccine after an exposure should still be considered non-immune and must be
excluded as described above.
Exposed healthcare personnel who had been previously vaccinated for mumps, but
received only one dose of mumps vaccine may continue working following an
unprotected exposure to mumps. Such workers should receive a second dose as soon
as possible, but no sooner than 28 days after the first. They should be educated about
symptoms of mumps, including non-specific presentations, and should notify
occupational health if they develop symptoms consistent with mumps in the 25 days
after the last known exposure.
Exposed healthcare personnel who are immune do not need to be excluded from work
following an unprotected exposure. However, because 1 dose of MMR vaccine is
about 80% effective in preventing mumps and 2 doses are about 90% effective, some
vaccinated personnel may remain at risk for infection. Therefore, healthcare workers
should be educated about symptoms of mumps, including non-specific presentations,
and should stay away from the work environment and notify occupational health if
they develop these symptoms in the 25 days after the last known exposure.
3. Immunization
Mumps vaccine has not been shown to be effective in preventing disease following an
exposure to an infected person. If susceptible contacts are vaccinated after exposure, the
exclusions mentioned above still apply. However, vaccination of susceptible contacts will
protect against disease from future exposures. Individuals who have had documented
mumps disease do not need to receive the mumps vaccine. Immune globulin (Ig) and
mumps immune globulin are not recommended after exposure to mumps.
Preschool children (ages 1–4 years) and adults not at high risk should receive 1 dose of
mumps vaccine in the form of MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine; for children in
grades K–12 and adults at high risk (i.e., persons who work in healthcare facilities,
international travelers, and students in post-high school educational institutions), 2 doses
of MMR are recommended.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 14 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

In outbreak situations, a second dose of mumps vaccine should be considered for children
aged 1–4 years and adults at low risk who have previously received 1 dose depending on
the epidemiology of the outbreak – e.g., the age groups and/or institutions involved.
(MMWR 2006;55(22):629–30). The second dose can be administered no sooner than 28
days after the first dose. See section 8A for contraindications to vaccination.
4. Education
All close contacts, regardless of immunity status, should be educated on the
signs/symptoms of mumps and told to watch for these signs/symptoms from the 12th day
after the first exposure through 25 days after the last exposure. If symptoms develop in
these contacts during that time period, they should have an understanding that respiratory
etiquette (see Section 8B) must be followed that and medical care should be sought
promptly; remember, the healthcare providers of exposed contacts should be made aware
of the mumps exposure in order to appropriately evaluate the patient for mumps and limit
risk to others in the office.
D. Environmental Measures
None
7. MANAGING SPECIAL SITUATIONS
A. Mumps in Healthcare Settings
For additional information regarding Prevention and Control of Mumps in Healthcare
Settings, see: https://www.cdc.gov/mumps/hcp.html.
8. ROUTINE PREVENTION
A. Immunization Recommendations
A live attenuated mumps virus vaccine (Jeryl Lynn strain) was introduced in the United
States in 1967 and is available in combination with rubella and measles live virus vaccines
(MMR). Routine immunization with MMR is recommended during childhood; the first dose
of MMR is recommended at 12–15 months of age with a second dose recommended at 4–6
years. Two doses of MMR vaccine are also recommended for students attending college and
other post-high school institutions. Although about 95% of susceptible persons develop
antibodies after a single dose of vaccine, summary information from an article* that reviewed
data on outbreaks of mumps in vaccinated populations and evaluated the effectiveness of 1
and 2 doses showed an effectiveness of prior vaccination with 1 dose of vaccine ranging
from 72.8% to 91% for the Jeryl Lynn strain. Vaccine effectiveness after 2 doses of mumps
vaccine was reported in 3 outbreaks and ranged from 91% to 94.6%. There was evidence of
waning immunity, which is a likely factor in mumps outbreaks.
*Clinical Infectious Diseases; 2008; Volume 47, Issue 11.Pp. 1458-1467. Dayan, Rubin, Plotkin.

Mumps vaccine is also available as a combined mumps, measles, rubella and varicella
vaccine (MMRV) (MMWR 2010;59(RR03):1-12).
Contraindications to vaccine include a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylactic allergy) to
neomycin, gelatin or a previous dose of MMR vaccine; pregnancy; and immunodeficiency or
immunosuppression. Persons with moderate or severe acute illness should not be vaccinated
until the illness has resolved. Receipt of antibody-containing blood products (e.g., immune

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 15 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

globulin, whole blood, or packed red blood cells) may interfere with seroconversion
following mumps vaccination. Vaccine should be given 2 weeks before, or deferred for at
least 3 months following, administration of an antibody-containing blood product.
For more information about MMR vaccine schedules, adverse reactions and
contraindications, please see the most recent Red Book.
B. Prevention Recommendations
In addition to immunization, persons should practice “respiratory etiquette” or good health
manners to stop the spread of respiratory pathogens.
Persons can keep respiratory pathogens to themselves by:
• Covering the nose and mouth with a tissue when sneezing, coughing or blowing the
nose.
• Throwing out used tissues in the trash as soon as possible.
• Always washing hands after sneezing, blowing the nose, or coughing, or after
touching used tissues or handkerchiefs.
• Washing hands often when sick.
• Using warm water and soap or alcohol-based hand sanitizers to wash hands.
• Staying home if coughing and febrile.
• Seeing a doctor as soon as possible if coughing and febrile, and following their
instructions, including taking medicine as prescribed and getting lots of rest.
• If requested, using face masks provided in doctors’ offices or clinic waiting rooms.
Persons can keep pathogens away by:
• Washing hands before eating, or touching eyes, nose or mouth.
• Washing hands after touching anyone else who is sneezing, coughing, blowing their
nose, or whose nose is running.
• Not sharing things like cigarettes, towels, lipstick, toys, or anything else that might be
contaminated with respiratory germs.
• Not sharing food, utensils or beverage containers with others.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document is a revision of the Washington State Guidelines for Notifiable Condition Reporting and Surveillance
published in 2002 which were originally based on the Control of Communicable Diseases Manual (CCDM), 17th
Edition; James Chin, Ed. APHA 2000. We would like to acknowledge the Oregon Department of Human Services
for developing the format and select content of this document.
UPDATES
December 2007 Revisions
Section 3B: Revisions were made to the examples of close contact.

March 2008 Revisions

Section 3A: The case definition was updated.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 16 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

October 2008 Revisions

Section 2G: A reference was added for the period of communicability.
Section 4A: Information was added regarding laboratory testing.
Section 6A: The recommendation for the duration of isolation for persons with mumps in
health care settings was updated (MMWR 2008;57 [No.40]:1103–4).
Section 6C: The recommendation for the duration of exclusion for exposed, non-immune
health care providers was updated (MMWR 2008;57 [No.40]:1103–4).

July 2010 Revisions

Section 4D: Information was added to describe the state’s new enhanced surveillance for
alternative parotitis etiology testing in collaboration with CDC.
An oropharyngeal swab and an additional buccal swab are now requested as additional
specimens to be collected and forwarded to PHL.
• Updated information in the laboratory section about optimal timing of buccal specimen
collection.
• Add information related to MMRV in the immunization section.
• Update the start of the exclusion from work period for health care workers exposed to person with
mumps from the 12th day after first unprotected exposure to the 9th day after first unprotected
exposure. (There is no change in the exclusion through 25 days following the last exposure.)

October 2010 Revision

Information about enhanced surveillance for alternative etiology testing was temporarily
removed pending a determination of exempt status by the Washington State Institutional
Review Board (WSIRB.)

January 2011:
The Legal Reporting Requirements section has been revised to reflect the 2011 Notifiable
Conditions Rule revision.
Section 6C2: A note added to clarify the period of communicability for the purpose of
outbreak control and management of exposed susceptible persons.
Section 4D: Information about enhanced surveillance for alternative etiology of sporadic
parotitis reinserted following a determination of exempt status by WSIRB.

March 2014:
Section 2C: Updated Washington State mumps incidence information to the present.
Section 3A:
• The case definition was updated to reflect the 2012 national definition.
• Supplemental guidance specific to mumps surveillance in Washington State (differs
from the national case definition in that reported cases with 2+ doses of vaccine and
no high risk exposure will continue to be classified as suspected cases in WA,
regardless of IgM test results when only serology is done.)
• A table regarding how cases should be classified based on lab test results was added.
Section 4B: Updated guidance regarding specimen submissions to PHL; an algorithm was
included.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 17 of 18
Mumps Reporting and Surveillance Guidelines

January 2017:
Section 3A:
• The case definition was updated to align with national mumps case definition and
supplemental case classifications guidance specific to mumps surveillance in WA
State (including an algorithm for routing mumps specimens for testing) were
removed.
Section 4:
• Specimen collection and submission guidance was updated to include urine.
• Guidance for circumstances in which commercial versus PHL serology testing should
be considered was added.
• Links to the WA PHL lab test menu and the mumps specimen handling guidelines
were added.

February 2017:
Section 6.C.2.
• Changed timing of exclusion for exposed susceptible health care workers from 9 days
after initial exposure to 12 days after initial exposure.

September 2017:
Section 6.C.2.
• Modified the language regarding exclusion of susceptible students as a mumps
control strategy during outbreaks to allow the local Health Officer maximal flexibility
in considering the circumstances of the outbreak when deciding whether the use of
exclusion should be implemented.

Last Revised: September 2017 Washington State Department of Health

Page 18 of 18