| Literature DB >> 26771379 |
José E Hagan1, Paula Moraga2, Federico Costa1,3,4, Nicolas Capian2, Guilherme S Ribeiro3,4, Elsio A Wunder1, Ridalva D M Felzemburgh3, Renato B Reis3, Nivison Nery3, Francisco S Santana3, Deborah Fraga3, Balbino L Dos Santos3, Andréia C Santos3, Adriano Queiroz3, Wagner Tassinari5, Marilia S Carvalho5, Mitermayer G Reis3, Peter J Diggle2, Albert I Ko1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rat-borne leptospirosis is an emerging zoonotic disease in urban slum settlements for which there are no adequate control measures. The challenge in elucidating risk factors and informing approaches for prevention is the complex and heterogeneous environment within slums, which vary at fine spatial scales and influence transmission of the bacterial agent. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26771379 PMCID: PMC4714915 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Urban slum community site in the city of Salvador, Brazil.
A) An aerial photograph of the study site shows the boundaries of the study site. B) A topographic map of the study site for which open sewer drainage systems have been overlaid. C) A representative photograph demonstrating the social and environmental gradient within the Pau da Lima community. D) Resident in contact with water and mud when cleaning an open sewer.
Fig 2Leptospiral infection rate according to age group and gender.
Rates are shown as infections per 1,000 annual follow-up events. Red bars: females. Blue bars: males. Whiskers: 95% CI.
Univariable risk factors for leptospiral infection duringduring prospective follow-up of the urban slum cohort, 2003–2007.
| Infection during follow-up event | No infection during follow-up event | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | No. or Median (% or IQR) | OR (95% CI) | |
| Year 1 | 51 (26%) | 1534 (28%) | Ref |
| Year 2 | 26 (13%) | 1298 (24%) | 0.60 (0.37–0.97) |
| Year 3 | 27 (14%) | 1367 (25%) | 0.57 (0.37–0.89) |
| Year 4 | 95 (48%) | 1228 (23%) | 2.33 (1.68–3.23) |
| Age (years) | 26 (17.5–37) | 24 (14–38) | 1.01 (1.00–1.01) |
| Male gender | 115 (58%) | 2268 (42%) | 1.94 (1.43–2.64) |
| Black ethnicity | 77 (39%) | 1953 (36%) | 1.13 (0.83–1.54) |
| Illiteracy | 54 (27%) | 926 (17%) | 1.82 (1.32–2.56) |
| Daily per capita household income (US$/day) | 1.57 (0.66–2.79) | 1.51 (0.78–2.83) | 1.04 (0.98–1.10) |
| Informal employment | 90 (45%) | 1811 (33%) | 1.59 (1.18–2.15) |
| History of prior hospitalization for leptospirosis | 6 (3%) | 25 (0%) | 7.03 (3.15–15.71) |
| Household elevation (1m) | 47.3 (36.1–61.2) | 53.2 (40.7–62.8) | 0.98 (0.97–0.99) |
| Distance from an open waste sewer (1m) | 20.1 (7.3–36.9) | 22.7 (9.0–40.2) | 0.99 (0.99–1.00) |
| Vegetation within 10m of home | 161 (81%) | 3720 (69%) | 1.96 (1.34–2.87) |
| Accumulated trash within 10m of home | 182 (92%) | 4504 (83%) | 2.23 (1.33–3.74) |
| Digging in or cleaning blocked sewers | 47 (24%) | 752 (14%) | 1.72 (1.20–2.46) |
| Contact with trash near home | 56 (28%) | 1040 (19%) | 1.52 (1.08–2.15) |
| Contact with mud near home | 95 (48%) | 1978 (36%) | 1.53 (1.15–2.05) |
| Contact with floodwater near home | 81 (41%) | 2326 (43%) | 0.87 (0.64–1.17) |
| Reporting rats in the peridomicilary environment | 157 (79%) | 3710 | 1.63 (1.15–2.30) |
| Dogs in household | 82 (41%) | 2095 (39%) | 1.08 (0.80–1.46) |
| Work in construction | 28 (14%) | 356 (7%) | 2.38 (1.56–3.64) |
| Work related to garbage removal | 4 (2%) | 17 (0%) | 6.82 (1.99–23.38) |
| Work associated with contact to sewers | 4 (2%) | 56 (1%) | 2.25 (0.85–5.99) |
N represents number of annual follow-up events (total, 5626)) with or without serologic evidence of infection.
No., number; IQR, interquartile range; Percentages reflect cases without missing values.
3OR, Odds Ratio; CI, Confidence Interval; Ref, reference.
Multivariable risk factors for leptospiral infection during prospective four-year follow-up of the urban slum cohort.
| Characteristic | OR (95% CI) |
|---|---|
| Year 1 | Ref |
| Year 2 | 0.64 (0.38–1.05) |
| Year 3 | 0.58 (0.35–0.95) |
| Year 4 | 2.45 (1.65–3.67) |
| 2.09 (1.54–2.84) | |
| Age (0–20 years old) | 1.11 (1.06–1.17) |
| Age (>20 years old) | 0.98 (0.97–1.00) |
| 1.88 (1.29–2.70) | |
| 0.92 (0.82–1.04) | |
| 1.46 (1.00–2.16) | |
| 1.57 (1.13–2.17) |
1 OR, Odds Ratio; CI, Confidence Interval; Ref, reference.
2 The effect of age is modeled as a broken linear model with a transition at 20 years old, as informed by the relationship described by Generalized Additive Modeling (S1 Fig)
Fig 3Risk of leptospiral infection within the Pau da Lima study site at each of four annual repeated measures during prospective follow-up of the community cohort.
The choropleth map indicates the 50 areas with highest odds of infection (red) and the 50 areas with lowest odds of infection (blue) at each follow-up period.