| Literature DB >> 25149658 |
Claudia Lamarca Vitral, Mônica da Silva-Nunes, Marcelo Alves Pinto1, Jaqueline Mendes de Oliveira, Ana Maria Coimbra Gaspar, Rebeca Cristina Costa Pereira, Marcelo Urbano Ferreira.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatitis A virus (HAV) and hepatitis E virus (HEV) are both transmitted by the faecal-oral route, and represent common causes of acute hepatitis in developing countries. The endemicity of HAV infection has shifted from high to moderate in Brazil. Human cases of HEV infection seem to be rare, although the virus has been detected in swine livestock and effluents of slaughterhouses. This study was to determine the epidemiology of hepatitis A and E in one of the largest agricultural settlements in the Amazon Basin of Brazil.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25149658 PMCID: PMC4152586 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-14-458
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Figure 1Location of the municipality of Acrelândia and Settlement Project Director (PAD) Padre Peixoto, known as Ramal do Granada.
Prevalence of HAV antibodies according to individual and household-level risk factors
| Variable | No. of subjectsa | HAV antibody prevalence (%) | Odds ratio (95% CI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||||
| 5-10 | 69 | 46.4 | 1.00 | <0.0001b |
| 11-20 | 111 | 80.2 | 4.68 (2.28-9.61) | |
| 21-30 | 67 | 95.5 | 24.67 (6.84-131.24) | |
| 31-50 | 103 | 97.1 | 38.54 (10.82-203.18) | |
| >50 | 47 | 93.6 | 16.96 (4.63-91.28) | |
| Sex | ||||
| Female | 190 | 84.7 | 1.29 (0.74-2.26) | 0.417 |
| Male | 207 | 81.1 | 1.00 | |
| Past history of hepatitis | ||||
| No | 345 | 81.4 | 1.00 | 0.082 |
| Yes | 52 | 93.2 | 2.73 (0.95-10.79) | |
| Education of household head (years of schooling) | ||||
| 0 | 81 | 87.6 | 2.12 (0.76-6.01) | 0.418b |
| 1-4 | 186 | 77.4 | 1.20 (0.52-2.63) | |
| 5-8 | 84 | 88.1 | 2.22 (0.80-6.26) | |
| >8 | 52 | 76.9 | 1.00 | |
| Wealth index (quartiles)c | ||||
| 1 (poorest) | 112 | 83.0 | 1.06 (0.47-2.39) | 0.973b |
| 2 | 101 | 82.2 | 1.00 (0.44-2.28) | |
| 3 | 100 | 84.0 | 1.14 (0.49-2.66) | |
| 4 (least poor) | 84 | 82.1 | 1.00 | |
| Water source | ||||
| Well | 375 | 82.4 | 1.00 | 0.462 |
| River/stream | 22 | 90.9 | 2.14 (0.50-19.27) | |
| Drinking water filtrated or chlorinated | ||||
| Yes | 308 | 83.4 | 1.00 | 0.523 |
| No | 73 | 79.4 | 0.77 (0.39-1.58) | |
| Crowding (number of inhabitants/room) | ||||
| <1 | 168 | 86.9 | 1.00 | 0.930b |
| 1-1.9 | 187 | 77.5 | 0.52 (0.28-0.94) | |
| 2-3 | 18 | 77.8 | 0.53 (0.15-2.41) | |
| >3 | 24 | 100 | Not calculable | |
Ramal do Granada, Brazil, 2004.
aNumber of individuals differ for some variables, because of missing values.
b Pvalues forχ2 tests for linear trend; all other P values are for standard χ2 tests.
cWealth index derived from information on household assets and other socioeconomic data; see the “Subjects, Methods” section.
95% CI, 95% confidence interval.
Results of the final multilevel logistic regression model including variables putatively associated with HAV antibodies
| Variable | Odds ratio | (95% CI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (in years, continuous variable) | 1.097 | (1.050-1.147) | <0.0001 |
| Sex (male | 0.594 | (0.381-0.929) | 0.022 |
| Crowding (number of inhabitants/room) | 1.603 | (1.054-2.440) | 0.028 |
Ramal do Granada, Brazil, 2004.
95% CI, 95% confidence interval.
Prevalence of HEV antibodies according to individual and household-level risk factors
| Variable | No. of subjectsa | HEV antibody prevalence (%) | Odds ratio (95% CI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | <0.008b | |||
| 5-10 | 66 | 9.1 | 1.00 | |
| 11-20 | 107 | 4.7 | 0.49 (0.11-2.03) | |
| 21-30 | 67 | 19.4 | 2.41 (0.78-8.23) | |
| 31-50 | 101 | 17.8 | 2.17 (0.76-7.05) | |
| >50 | 47 | 17.0 | 2.05 (0.57-7.72) | |
| Sex | ||||
| Female | 184 | 14.1 | 1.23 (0.65-2.34) | 0.290 |
| Male | 204 | 11.8 | 1.00 | |
| Past history of hepatitis | ||||
| No | 337 | 13.3 | 1.00 | 0.631 |
| Yes | 52 | 9.8 | 0.71 (0.21-1.91) | |
| Education of household head (years of schooling) | 0.046b | |||
| 0 | 81 | 18.5 | 2.73 (0.80-11.92) | |
| 1-4 | 174 | 13.2 | 1.83 (0.58-7.61) | |
| 5-8 | 81 | 9.9 | 1.32 (0.33-6.29) | |
| >8 | 52 | 7.7 | 1.00 | |
| Wealth index (quartiles)c | ||||
| 1 (poorest) | 109 | 12.8 | 1.60 (0.57-4.92) | 0.497b |
| 2 | 98 | 14.3 | 1.81 (0.64-5.57) | |
| 3 | 98 | 15.3 | 1.96 (0.70-5.99) | |
| 4 (least poor) | 83 | 8.4 | 1.00 | |
| Water source | ||||
| Well | 366 | 13.4 | 1.00 | 0.382 |
| River/stream | 22 | 4.5 | 0.31 (0.01-2.01) | |
| Drinking water filtrated or chlorinated | ||||
| Yes | 302 | 13.2 | 1.00 | 0.961 |
| No | 72 | 13.9 | 1.06 (0.45-2.30) | |
| Crowding (number of inhabitants/room) | ||||
| <1 | 161 | 13.7 | 1.00 | 0.673b |
| 1-1.9 | 181 | 12.1 | 0.87 (0.44-1.73) | |
| 2-3 | 22 | 18.2 | 1.40 (0.32-4.83) | |
| >3 | 24 | 8.3 | 0.57 (0.06-2.63) | |
Ramal do Granada, Brazil, 2004.
aNumber of individuals differ for some variables, because of missing values.
b Pvalues forχ2 tests for linear trend; all other P values are for standard χ2 tests.
cWealth index derived from information on household assets and other socioeconomic data; see the “Subjects, Methods” section.
95% CI, 95% confidence interval.