| Literature DB >> 27386300 |
Hagos Asgedom1, Delesa Damena1, Reta Duguma2.
Abstract
Brucellosis is a zoonotic disease with economic and public health impact, particularly for human and animal populations within developing countries that relay on livestock production. A cross sectional study was conducted between October 2013 and March 2014 in and around Alage district to determine the seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis and associated risk factors. A total of 804 sera samples; 421 from cattle managed under extensive production system and 383 from cattle managed under intensive production system were collected. Multistage cluster sampling method was employed to sample unvaccinated cattle above 6 months of age. Rose Bengal Plate Test and c-ELISA were used in serial for detection of antibodies against Brucella species. The overall seroprevalence was 2.4 %, and herd level seroprevalence was 45.9 %. A prevalence of 3.3 and 1.3 % was recorded in the extensive and intensive farms respectively. Among the three sites, seropositivity of 3.4 % in Naka, 3.3 % in Negelewudisha and 1.3 % in Alage were recorded. Risk factors such as age, sex, number of service per conception, calving interval and reproductive status were associated with serostatus of brucellosis. Taken as a whole, cattle in both intensive and extensive production systems are endemically infected by brucellosis at low level in the study areas. This warrants the need of integrated intervention strategies to minimize the spread of the disease in animals and reduce the risk of transmission to humans.Entities:
Keywords: Alage; Bovine brucellosis; Intensive and extensive farms; Risk factors; Seroprevalence
Year: 2016 PMID: 27386300 PMCID: PMC4919196 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2547-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Occupational risks and awareness among farm works and farmers about brucellosis in intensive and extensive farms in the study areas
| Variable | Intensive farms (n) | Extensive farms (n) |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge about brucellosis | ||||
| Yes | 28 | 13 | ||
| No | 12 | 47 | 23.18 | 0.00 |
| Use of PPE | ||||
| Yes | 33 | 12 | ||
| No | 7 | 48 | 37.88 | 0.00 |
| Assisted animals giving birth | ||||
| Yes | 21 | 47 | ||
| No | ||||
| Habit of drinking raw milk or eating raw meat | 19 | 13 | 7.36 | 0.01 |
| Yes | 28 | 48 | ||
| No | 12 | 12 | 1.32 | 0.34 |
Over all seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in the intensive and extensive farms of the study area assessed by Chi-square
| Factor | Level | n | Test +ve | % | OR | 95 % CI | χ2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Farm type | Intensive | 383 | 5 | 1.3 | ||||
| Extensive | 421 | 14 | 3.3 | 2.60 | 0.93–7.29 | 3.54 | 0.06 |
Herd level seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in intensive and extensive farms in the study area assessed by Chi square
| Factor | Level | n | Test +ve | % | OR | 95 % CI | χ2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Farm type | Extensive | 33 | 14 | 42.4 | ||||
| Intensive | 4 | 3 | 75 | 4.07 | 0.38–43.38 | 1.52 | 0.22 |
Seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in three different sites in the study area assessed by logistic regression
| Factor | Level | n | Test +ve | % | OR | 95 % CI | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sites | Alagea | 383 | 5 | 1.3 | – | – | – |
| Negele Wudisha | 246 | 8 | 3.3 | 2.54 | 0.82–7.86 | 0.105 | |
| Naka | 175 | 6 | 3.4 | 2.68 | 0.81–8.92 | 0.107 |
aIn reference to
Association between animal characteristics and seropositivity of Brucella assessed by logistic regression and Chi-square
| Factors | Level | n | Test +ve | % | OR | 95 % CI | Z-test | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.5 ≤ 3a | 233 | 1 | 0.4 | ||||
| 3 ≤ 6 | 308 | 4 | 1.3 | 3.2262 | 28.32–30.53 | 1.0386 | 0.299 | |
| ≥7 | 263 | 14 | 5.3 | 11.376 | 90.33–85.47 | 2.3308 | 0.0198 | |
| Sex | Fa | 529 | 18 | 3.4 | ||||
| M | 275 | 1 | 0.4 | 0.104 | 0.014–0.78 | −2.3742 | 0.007 | |
| Breed | Arsia | 494 | 16 | 3.2 | ||||
| HF | 149 | 1 | 0.7 | 0.1724 | 0.302–3.75 | −1.3915 | 0.1641 | |
| Boran | 161 | 2 | 1.2 | 0.4001 | 2.02–4.15 | −0.8571 | 0.3914 | |
| Herd size | ≤20a | 232 | 6 | 2.3 | ||||
| >20 | 572 | 13 | 2.6 | 1.6378 | 4.30–5.28 | 0.3586 | 0.7199 |
aOthers were computed in reference to this category
Association between Brucella seropositivity and reproductive performance of cattle in the study area assessed by logistic regression
| Factors | Level | n | Test +ve | % | OR | 95 % CI | Z-test | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSPC | 1a | 262 | 2 | 0.8 | ||||
| 2 | 82 | 5 | 6 | 8.3974 | 41.96–46.23 | 2.5147 | 0.011 | |
| ≥3 | 29 | 10 | 34.5 | 62.053 | 303.4–311.55 | 5.0546 | 0.000 | |
| Calving interval | 1 ≤ 2 yearsa | 218 | 4 | 1.8 | ||||
| 1 years | 48 | 1 | 2.1 | 8.609 | 0.005–0.351 | 3.0178 | 0.003 | |
| >2 years | 33 | 11 | 33.3 | 27.622 | 0.011–0.127 | 84.683 | 0.000 | |
| Reproductive status | Heifera | 85 | 1 | 1.2 | ||||
| Lactating | 140 | 2 | 1.4 | 0.821 | 0.073–9.20 | 0.87 | ||
| Dry | 107 | 4 | 3.7 | 2.68 | 0.481–9.91 | 1.8413 | 0.26 | |
| Pregnant | 148 | 11 | 7.4 | 5.54 | 1.21–25.46 | −1.996 | 0.028 |
aOthers were computed in reference to this category