| Literature DB >> 23951376 |
Robert D Sumaye1, Eveline Geubbels, Edgar Mbeyela, Dirk Berkvens.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent years, evidence of Rift Valley fever (RVF) transmission during inter-epidemic periods in parts of Africa has increasingly been reported. The inter-epidemic transmissions generally pass undetected where there is no surveillance in the livestock or human populations. We studied the presence of and the determinants for inter-epidemic RVF transmission in an area experiencing annual flooding in southern Tanzania.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23951376 PMCID: PMC3738442 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002356
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1Study area depicting spatial distribution pattern of RVF seroconversion in livestock.
The graduated colors indicate output of IDW based on actual number of seropositive animals to RVFV antibodies in all species. The round dots represent location of households from which livestock were sampled and clustering pattern given by Z-scores (red, blue and white colorations indicating hotspot, cold spot and random pattern respectively). The black stars indicate households where IgM positive animals were sampled. The insert is Map of Tanzania showing districts of Kilombero and Ulanga, and location of study site within.
Potential animal level risk factors associated with RVF sero-positivity for cattle, goats and sheep in the Kilombero Valley, Tanzania based on a univariable random effect logistic regression model.
| Variable | Level | %Positive (n) | OR | 95% CI |
|
| Cattle | 11.03 (970) | 1 | |
| Goat | 11.86 (455) | 1.06 | 0.74–1.52 | |
| Sheep | 11.37 (255) | 1.07 | 0.68–1.69 | |
|
| Female | 14.16 (1144) | 1 | |
| Male | 5.22 (536) | 0.30 | 0.19–0.46 | |
|
| Exotic | 9.54 (220) | 1 | |
| Local | 11.61 (1420) | 1.23 | 0.70–2.15 | |
| Mixed | 10.00 (40) | 0.95 | 0.28–3.14 | |
|
| Kilombero | 10.69 (1234) | 1 | |
| Ulanga | 13.00 (446) | 1.17 | 0.68–2.03 | |
|
| No | 5.55 (1116) | 1 | |
| Yes | 22.69 (564) | 5.29 | 3.79–7.38 | |
|
| One species | 10.27 (360) | 1 | |
| Two species | 10.30 (359) | 1.08 | 0.64–1.83 | |
| Three species | 12.07 (961) | 1.24 | 0.80–1.92 | |
|
| <5 km | 10.74 (1117) | 1 | |
| 5–10 km | 14.01 (157) | 1.27 | 0.72–2.21 | |
| 10–15 km | 7.94 (214) | 0.75 | 0.41–1.37 | |
| >15 km | 16.14 (192) | 1.62 | 0.91–2.86 | |
|
| Mixed | 4.76 (21) | 1 | |
| Grazing | 11.30 (1592) | 2.29 | 0.29–18.18 | |
| Cut & carry | 13.43 (67) | 2.80 | 0.31–25.06 | |
|
| Continuous | n/a | 1.007 | 0.99–1.01 |
OR = Odds ratio; CI = Confidence interval.
Figure 2Seropositivity to Rift Valley fever virus in cattle, sheep and goats pooled by age.
The error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals of the percentage.
Animal level risk factors associated with RVF sero-positivity for cattle, goats and sheep in the Kilombero valley in multivariable analysis.
| Variable | Levels | OR | 95% CI |
|
| Female | 1 | |
| Male | 0.41 | 0.26–0.63 | |
|
| No | 1 | |
| Yes | 4.67 | 3.33–6.55 | |
|
| <5 km | 1 | |
| 5–10 km | 1.28 | 0.72–2.29 | |
| 10–15 km | 0.89 | 0.48–1.65 | |
| >15 km | 1.92 | 1.04–3.56 |
OR = Odds ratio; CI = Confidence interval.