| Literature DB >> 24056480 |
Alejandro Dorado-García1, Marian Eh Bos, Haitske Graveland, Brigitte Agl Van Cleef, Koen M Verstappen, Jan Ajw Kluytmans, Jaap A Wagenaar, Dick Jj Heederik.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) emergence is a major public health concern. This study was aimed at assessing risk factors for persistently carrying MRSA in veal calf farmers and their family members. We also evaluate the dynamics of MRSA environmental load during the veal-calf production cycle.Entities:
Keywords: Epidemiology
Year: 2013 PMID: 24056480 PMCID: PMC3780428 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Crude and adjusted for sex and age prevalence ratios (PR) for nasal MRSA-persistent carriage in 195 veal calf farmers and household members from 51 farms
| Determinant | Category | N | Number persistent carriers† (prevalence %) | Mean (range) | PR | 95% CI | PR‡ adjusted | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General characteristics | ||||||||
| Sex | Male | 103 | 9 (8.7) | – | 1 | – | – | – |
| Female | 92 | 11 (12.0) | – | 1.4 | 0.6 to 3.2 | – | – | |
| Age | – | 195 | – | 30 (0.1–81) | 1.0 | 1.0 to 1.0** | – | – |
| Per 10 years increase | – | 195 | – | – | 1.3 | 1.1 to 1.6** | – | – |
| Farm and household characteristics | ||||||||
| Presence of sheep in farm | No | 149 | 12 (8.1) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 46 | 8 (17.4) | – | 2.2 | 1.1 to 4.5* | 2.4 | 1.2 to 4.8* | |
| Presence of cats on farm | No | 96 | 5 (5.2) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 99 | 15 (15.2) | – | 3.0 | 1.2 to 7.1* | 2.7 | 1.1 to 6.6* | |
| Presence of pets | No | 74 | 4 (5.4) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 121 | 16 (13.2) | – | 2.7 | 1.0 to 7.4* | 2.6 | 1.0 to 6.7§ | |
| Tasks performed last 7 days¶ | ||||||||
| Sorting calves (stable management) | No | 113 | 5 (4.4) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 82 | 15 (18.3) | – | 4.2 | 1.5 to 12.3** | 4.7 | 1.3 to 16.8* | |
| Healthcare/control†† | No | 132 | 9 (6.8) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 63 | 11 (17.5) | – | 2.6 | 1.1 to 6.1* | 2.3 | 0.8 to 7.3 | |
| Feeding calves | No | 72 | 2 (2.8) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 123 | 18 (14.6) | – | 7.2 | 0.9 to 58.6§ | 5.4 | 0.6 to 52.3 | |
| Work at farm, hygiene cleaning and disinfection | ||||||||
| Administration of antibiotics during | No | 131 | 8 (6.1) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| last month | Yes | 64 | 12 (18.8) | – | 3.2 | 1.4 to 7.1** | 3.4 | 1.3 to 9.1* |
| Number of working hours per week | – | 195 | – | 16.5 (0–80) | 1.0 | 1.0 to 1.0*** | 1.0 | 1.0 to 1.1** |
| Per 20 h increase | – | – | – | – | 1.8 | 1.4 to 2.4*** | 2.5 | 1.4 to 4.2** |
| Clean towel | No | 45 | 7 (16.7) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 150 | 13 (8.67) | – | 0.6 | 0.3 to 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.3 to 1.1 | |
| Changing room available | No | 18 | 3 (16.7) | – | 1 | – | 1 | |
| Yes | 177 | 17 (9.7) | – | 0.6 | 0.3 to 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 to 1.0§ | |
| Cleaning of baby boxes | No | 184 | 18 (9.8) | – | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 11 | 2 (18.2) | – | 1.9 | 1.0 to 3.5* | 1.3 | 0.6 to 2.8 | |
†A person is considered a persistent carrier when all nasal swabs at days 0, 4 and 7 are positive for MRSA.
‡Prevalence ratios adjusted for sex and age.
§Non-significant trend (p Value 0.05–0.10). * p Value 0.01–0.05. **p Value 0.0001–0.01. ***p Value <0.0001.
¶Tasks performed in the week before time 0.
††The task healthcare and control includes the administration of antibiotics.
MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Figure 1Probability of nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) persistent carriage and its relationship with the log-transformed colony-forming units from MRSA-positive nasal swabs at day 0. Non-parametric regression modelling.
Results from multiple logistic regression analysis for nasal MRSA-persistent carriage in veal calf farmers and their household members (N=195)
| Determinant | Category | PR | 95% CI | p Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model A | ||||
| Number of working hours per week | – | 1.03 | 1.02 to 1.04 | 0.000* |
| per 20 h increase | 1.81 | 1.49 to 2.19 | – | |
| Presence of cats on farm | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 2.80 | 1.23 to 6.36 | 0.014* | |
| Presence of sheep in farm | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 1.83 | 0.89 to 3.77 | 0.100 | |
| Changing room available | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 0.48 | 0.20 to 1.13 | 0.094 | |
| Cleaning of baby boxes | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 3.96 | 1.59 to 9.90 | 0.003* | |
| Model B | ||||
| Age | – | 1.02 | 1.00 to 1.05 | 0.037* |
| per 10 years increase | – | 1.26 | 1.01 to 1.56 | – |
| Presence of cats on farm | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 2.57 | 1.05 to 6.33 | 0.040* | |
| Presence of sheep in farm | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 1.78 | 0.88 to 3.59 | 0.107 | |
| Sorting calves | No | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 3.10 | 1.14 to 8.47 | 0.027* | |
Model A: final model in which all variables meeting eligibility criteria were added to the automatic selection. Model B: final model in which all the variables in model A were added to the automatic selection except number of working hours.
*p Value statistically significant (ie, <0.05).
MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; PR, prevalence ratio.
Environmental MRSA samples (EDCs) taken in stables at the beginning of the production cycle in 51 farms with persistent, intermittent or non-MRSA carrying veal calf farmers and household members
| Persistent* | Intermittent* | Non-carrier* | p Value† | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of farms with MRSA-positive EDCs/total number of farms (%) | 2/18 (11.11) | 2/12 (16.67) | 2/21 (9.52) | 0.86 |
| Number of MRSA positive EDCs/total number of EDCs (%) | 2/69 (2.90) | 4/47 (8.51) | 3/78 (3.85) | 0.38 |
| GM MRSA CFU/EDC (p Value) ‡ | <1 (0.75) | <1 (0.29) | <1 (ref.) | – |
*A farm was categorised as persistent when there was at least one persistent carrier living and/or working on the farm, non-carrier farms had no individual positive for MRSA in nasal swabs on days 0, 4, 7 and intermittent farms were the remaining.
†p Values among proportions were calculated with Fisher's exact test. Mean values had not an overall assigned p value since they could not be tested with non-parametric tests.
‡Geometric mean (antilogged results from tobit regression). p Values indicate the difference with the reference category (non-carrier farm).
CFU, colony-forming units; EDC, Electrostatic Dust Collector; GM, geometric means; MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Environmental MRSA samples (EDCs) taken in stables and houses on week 12 in 49 farms with MRSA carriers and non-carriers
| Location EDC | Carrier farms* | Non-carrier farms* | p Value† |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of farms with MRSA-positive EDCs/total number of farms (%) | |||
| Stable | 22/25 (88.00) | 17/24 (70.83) | 0.14 |
| House | 3/25 (12.00) | 7/24 (29.17) | 0.17 |
| Number of MRSA-positive EDCs/total number of EDCs (%) | |||
| Stable | 54/90 (60.00) | 35/86 (40.70) | 0.01 |
| House‡ | – | – | – |
| GM§ MRSA CFU/EDC | |||
| Stable | 27.54 | 16.98 | 0.06 |
| House | 2.29 | 5.50 | 0.29 |
*A farm was categorised as carrier when there was at least one carrier on week 12 living and/or working on the farm, non-carrier farms were the remaining.
†p Values among proportions were calculated with χ2 test and Fisher's exact test when 20% of the expected cell values were <5. p Values for the GM indicate the difference with the reference category (non-carrier farms).
‡There was one EDC per house, thus the values in this line are the same as the ones in ‘Number of farms with MRSA-positive EDCs/total number of farms (%)’.
§Geometric mean (antilogged results from tobit regression).
CFU, colony-forming units; EDC, Electrostatic Dust Collector; GM, geometric means; MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus;