| Literature DB >> 29197383 |
Jessie A Gleason1, Kathleen M Ross2,3, Rebecca D Greeley2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of legionellosis throughout North America and Europe continues to increase, public health investigations have not been able to identify a common exposure in most cases. Over 80% of cases are sporadic with no known source. To better understand the role of the macro-environment in legionellosis risk, a retrospective ecological study assessed associations between population-level measures of demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental factors and high-risk areas.Entities:
Keywords: Cluster analysis; Ecological study; GIS; Legionellosis; Legionnaires’ disease; SaTScan™
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29197383 PMCID: PMC5712152 DOI: 10.1186/s12942-017-0118-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Health Geogr ISSN: 1476-072X Impact factor: 3.918
Unadjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of macro-level demographic and environmental factors and increased odds of legionellosis occurrence
| Incidence ratea | Standard clusterb | Reliable, high-risk clusterc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |
| % ≥ 65 years of age | ||||||
| < 10 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 10 to < 15 | 1.10 | 0.88–1.37 |
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 15 | 0.84 | 0.66–1.07 |
|
|
|
|
| % non-white race | ||||||
| < 10 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 10 to < 50 | 1.00 | 0.79–1.26 | 0.81 | 0.57–1.17 | 0.89 | 0.54–1.47 |
| ≥ 50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % hispanic ethnicity | ||||||
| < 5 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 5 to < 20 | 1.19 | 0.96–1.48 |
|
| 1.05 | 0.70–1.58 |
| ≥ 20 | 1.08 | 0.84–1.39 |
|
| 0.78 | 0.47–1.28 |
| % poverty | ||||||
| < 5 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 5 to < 15 |
|
|
|
| 1.40 | 0.86–2.25 |
| ≥ 15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % less or some high school | ||||||
| < 5 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 5 to < 10 | 1.24 | 0.99–1.55 | 1.22 | 0.85–1.75 | 1.52 | 0.92–2.48 |
| ≥ 10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % homes built pre-1950 | ||||||
| < 5 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 5 to < 20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % homes built pre-1970 | ||||||
| < 15 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 15 to < 35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % renter occupied | ||||||
| < 10 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 10 to < 55 | 1.06 | 0.84–1.34 | 1.41 | 0.96–2.09 | 1.50 | 0.86–2.61 |
| ≥ 55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| % vacant housing | ||||||
| < 5 | – | – | – | |||
| ≥ 5 to < 10 | 0.85 | 0.69–1.04 |
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 10 | 1.22 | 0.96–1.56 |
|
|
|
|
| Primary water sourced | ||||||
| Groundwater | – | – | – | |||
| Surface water | 0.77 | 0.60–1.00 | 0.80 | 0.56–1.15 | 0.90 | 0.56–1.45 |
Missing values were excluded from analysis
Values in italics are statistically significantly at a significance level of 5%
Ecological study design at the census tract level
aAge- and sex-adjusted incidence greater or equal to 2 cases per 100,000 persons
bSignificant cluster with 50% of population at risk, relative risk greater or equal to 2 cases per 100,000 persons
cExposed census tracts defined as RR > 2 and reliability score > 0.5
dPopulation-weighted centroids of census tracts were joined with public water system polygons
Fig. 3Reliable, high-risk legionellosis clusters detected utilizing reliability score methodology and SaTScan™ software with census tract as geographic unit, in New Jersey, USA, 2003–2013. The variable was stratified into 0.1 increments and each increment was assigned its own data layer. Census tracts with a reliability score of 0 were presented at 80% transparency and with each reliability score category a 20% transparency deduction was made until the census tracts with the highest relatability scores would be fully opaque. Within each transparency layer, relative risk was categorized into five groups, each assigned a distinct color. The highest relative risk category was assigned a bold, dark red. With each decreasing relative risk category, the color scheme became more muted such that the lowest category was assigned a very pale yellow/nude color
Methods use to assess spatial variability of legionellosis, classification criteria for high-risk census tracts, and corresponding number of census tracts, cases, and estimated population captured by each method
| Method of spatial variability | “High-risk” classification | # of census tracts identified as “high-risk” | # of cases residing in “high-risk” census tract | Estimated population within “high-risk” census tract |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted IR | IR ≥ 2 per 100,000 | 744 | 1407 | 3,126,058 |
| Standardized IR | IR ≥ 2 per 100,000 | 724 | 1376 | 3,151,260 |
| 1% cluster detection | Detected within a cluster | 93 | 243 | 327,824 |
| 50% cluster detection | Detected within a cluster | 259 | 412 | 981,983 |
| Reliable cluster detection | RS ≥ 0.5 and a RR ≥ 2 | 136 | 397 | 507,694 |
IR incidence rate, RS reliability score, RR relative risk
Fig. 1Unadjusted and age and sex-adjusted legionellosis incidence rates by census tract in New Jersey, USA, 2003–2013
Fig. 2Statistically significant legionellosis clusters detected using SaTScan™ software with census tract as geographic unit with 1 and 50% of the population at risk in New Jersey, USA, 2003–2013
Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of macro-level demographic and environmental factors and increased odds of legionellosis occurrence
| Model Aa | Model Bb | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |
| % ≥ 65 years of age | ||||
| < 10 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 10 to < 15 |
|
| 0.65 | 0.41–1.03 |
| ≥ 15 |
|
|
|
|
| % non-white race | ||||
| < 10 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 10 to < 50 | 0.85 | 0.49–1.48 | 0.82 | 0.45–1.51 |
| ≥ 50 | 1.68 | 0.92–3.07 | 1.27 | 0.61–2.65 |
| % hispanic ethnicity | ||||
| < 5 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 5 to < 20 |
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 20 |
|
|
|
|
| % poverty | ||||
| < 5 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 5 to < 15 | 1.52 | 0.91–2.52 | 1.39 | 0.82–2.33 |
| ≥ 15 |
|
|
|
|
| % less or some high school | ||||
| < 5 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 5 to < 10 | 1.37 | 0.78–2.39 | ||
| ≥ 10 | 1.25 | 0.67–2.32 | ||
| % homes built pre-1950 | ||||
| < 5 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 5 to < 20 |
|
|
|
|
| ≥ 20 |
|
|
|
|
| % renter occupied | ||||
| < 10 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 10 to < 55 | 0.99 | 0.51–1.95 | ||
| ≥ 55 | 1.28 | 0.54–3.02 | ||
| % vacant housing | ||||
| < 5 | – | – | ||
| ≥ 5 to < 10 | 1.19 | 0.70–2.03 | ||
| ≥ 10 | 1.49 | 0.81–2.74 | ||
| Primary water sourcec | ||||
| Groundwater | – | – | ||
| Surface water | 0.70 | 0.41–1.22 | ||
Missing values were excluded from analysis
Values in italics are statistically significantly at a significance level of 5%
Ecological study design at the census tract level
aMultivariate stepwise logistic regression model
bFull multivariate logistic regression model
cPopulation-weighted centroids of census tracts were joined with public water system polygons