| Literature DB >> 30759722 |
Kevin Tsai1, Sheillah Simiyu2, Jane Mumma3, Rose Evalyne Aseyo4, Oliver Cumming5, Robert Dreibelbis6, Kelly K Baker7.
Abstract
Pediatric diarrheal disease remains the second most common cause of preventable illness and death among children under the age of five, especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, there is limited information regarding the role of food in pathogen transmission in LMICs. For this study, we examined the frequency of enteric pathogen occurrence and co-occurrence in 127 infant weaning foods in Kisumu, Kenya, using a multi-pathogen PCR diagnostic tool, and assessed household food hygiene risk factors for contamination. Bacterial, viral, and protozoan enteric pathogen DNA and RNA were detected in 62% of the infant weaning food samples collected, with 37% of foods containing more than one pathogen type. Multivariable generalized linear mixed model analysis indicated type of infant food best explained the presence and diversity of enteric pathogens in infant food, while most household food hygiene risk factors considered in this study were not significantly associated with pathogen contamination. Specifically, cow's milk was significantly more likely to contain a pathogen (adjusted risk ratio = 14.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.78⁻116.1) and more likely to have higher number of enteric pathogen species (adjusted risk ratio = 2.35; 95% CI 1.67⁻3.29) than porridge. Our study demonstrates that infants in this low-income urban setting are frequently exposed to diarrhoeagenic pathogens in food and suggests that interventions are needed to prevent foodborne transmission of pathogens to infants.Entities:
Keywords: TaqMan Array Card; food; infants; milk; pathogen diversity; pathogen presence; sanitation
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30759722 PMCID: PMC6388216 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16030506
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Conceptual model of hazard points (white boxes, right) where enteric pathogen contamination could enter the food preparation and feeding process for infants (grey boxes, left), and the mitigating actions that could prevent contamination transmission (gridded boxes, center).
Socio-economic demographic statistics for 127 caregivers and infant dyads in Kisumu.
| Variable | Category | Number of Samples | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infant gender | Male | 58 | 46 |
| Female | 69 | 54 | |
| Marriage status of caregiver | Married | 108 | 85 |
| Single | 17 | 13 | |
| Divorced | 2 | 2 | |
| Education level of caregiver | Some primary | 27 | 21 |
| Complete primary | 35 | 28 | |
| Some secondary | 27 | 21 | |
| Complete secondary | 38 | 30 | |
| Occupation | Agriculture | 1 | 1 |
| Domestic service | 8 | 6 | |
| Not employed | 60 | 47 | |
| Managerial | 9 | 7 | |
| Sales and service | 33 | 26 | |
| Other | 6 | 4 | |
| Missing | 10 | 8 | |
| Village | A | 34 | 27 |
| B | 35 | 28 | |
| C | 24 | 19 | |
| D | 34 | 27 | |
| Infant age | 3–6 months | 30 | 24 |
| More than 6 months | 97 | 76 |
Demographic statistics for 127 infant foods in households in Kisumu by household and food hygiene conditions.
| Variable | Categories | Number of Samples | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Food type | Milk | 20 | 16 |
| Porridge | 81 | 64 | |
| Non-milk or porridge combined | 26 | 20 | |
| Tea | 7 | 6 | |
| Water | 13 | 10 | |
| Other * | 6 | 5 | |
| Container type | Bottle/feeding bottle/jug | 53 | 42 |
| covered | 26 | 20 | |
| Fresh food | 13 | 10 | |
| Thermos | 24 | 19 | |
| Uncovered | 11 | 9 | |
| Month of sampling | January | 77 | 61 |
| March | 30 | 24 | |
| May | 20 | 16 | |
| Owning animals | Yes | 43 | 34 |
| No | 84 | 66 | |
| Keeping animals inside | Yes | 78 | 61 |
| No | 39 | 31 | |
| Missing data | 10 | 8 | |
| Sharing eating containers with family members | Yes | 43 | 34 |
| No | 84 | 66 | |
| Food preparation area | |||
| Floor type in preparation area | Permeable floor | 26 | 20 |
| Non-permeable floor | 101 | 80 | |
| Flies in preparation area | Yes | 40 | 32 |
| No | 77 | 61 | |
| Missing data | 10 | 8 | |
| Animal feces in preparation area | Yes | 10 | 8 |
| No | 117 | 92 | |
| Handwashing station in preparation area | Yes | 26 | 20 |
| No | 101 | 80 | |
| Feeding area | |||
| Floor type in feeding area | Permeable floor | 22 | 17 |
| Non-permeable floor | 105 | 83 | |
| Flies present in feeding area | Yes | 40 | 31 |
| No | 77 | 61 | |
| Missing data | 10 | 8 | |
| Animal feces present in feeding area | Yes | 10 | 8 |
| No | 117 | 92 | |
| Handwashing station in feeding area | Yes | 19 | 15 |
| No | 108 | 85 | |
* “Other” includes tea, bread, mashed potatoes, and beans.
Type of detected pathogens in all infant foods overall, and by month.
| Any Type of Pathogen | Overall ( | January ( | March ( | May ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 79 (62) | 40 (52) | 27 (90) | 12 (60) | |
| Virus | ||||
| Adenovirus 40/41 | 15 (12) | 3 (3) | 10 (33) | 2 (10) |
| Adenovirus Hexon | 6 (5) | 1 (1) | 3 (10) | 2 (10) |
| Norovirus | 9 (7) | 4 (5) | 3 (10) | 2 (10) |
| Sapovirus | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Bacteria | ||||
| EAEC | 6 (5) | 4 (5) | 2 (7) | 0 (0) |
| EPEC | 21 (17) | 3 (4) | 15 (50) | 3 (15) |
| ETEC | 17 (13) | 13 (17) | 3 (10) | 1 (5) |
| EHEC O157 | 21 (17) | 0 (0) | 21 (70) | 0 (0) |
| STEC | 5 (4) | 0 (0) | 5 (17) | 0 (0) |
| EIEC/Shigella | 7 (6) | 4 (5) | 3 (10) | 0 (0) |
|
| 25 (20) | 12 (16) | 5 (17) | 8 (40) |
|
| 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) |
|
| 11 (9) | 5 (7) | 5 (17) | 1 (5) |
| Protozoa | ||||
|
| 13 (10) | 10 (13) | 2 (7) | 1 (5) |
EAEC: Enteroaggregative E. coli; EPEC: Enteropathogenic E. coli; ETEC: Enterotoxigenic E. coli; EHEC: Enterohemorrhagic E. coli 0157; STEC: Shiga toxin-expressing E. coli; EIEC: Enteroinvasive E. coli. No detection for Astrovirus, Rotavirus, Salmonella_enterica, H. pylori, Vibrio Cholerae, Vibrio parahaemolytic, Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium hominus, Cryptosporidium parvum, Helminths, E. histolytica, A. Lumbricoides, N. americanus, S. Sterocoralis, T. trichiura.
Bivariate and multivariable generalized linear mixed models of food contamination risk factors and enteric pathogen presence in infant weaning foods.
| Variable | % positive (Total | Bivariate RR (95% CI) | Multivariable RR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food | |||||
| Porridge | 56 (81) | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| Milk | 95 (20) | 14.4 (1.78–116.1) | 0.01 | 18.0 (1.85–175.6) | 0.01 |
| Non-milk/porridge | 58 (26) | 0.79 (0.28–2.17) | 0.65 | 1.00 (0.33–1.12) | 1 |
| Container Type | |||||
| Covered | 77 (26) | 3.36 (0.57–19.9) | 0.18 | ||
| Thermos | 75 (24) | 6.51 (1.10–38.6) | 0.04 | ||
| Bottle/feeder/jug | 51 (53) | 2.50 (0.47–13.4) | 0.28 | ||
| Uncovered | 55 (11) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Fresh | 62 (13) | 2.21 (0.32–15.0) | 0.42 | ||
| Owning Animals | |||||
| Yes | 62 (84) | 1.08 (0.47–2.49) | 0.85 | ||
| No | 63 (43) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Keeping Animals Inside | |||||
| Yes | 59 (78) | 0.74 (0.30–1.84) | 0.51 | ||
| No | 67 (39) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Missing | 70 (10) | None | None | ||
| Sharing Containers | |||||
| Yes | 51 (43) | 0.39 (0.16–0.92) | 0.03 | ||
| No | 68 (84) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Floor Permeability in Preparation Area | |||||
| Permeable | 73 (26) | 1.45 (0.50–4.25) | 0.5 | ||
| Nonpermeable | 59 (101) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Flies in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 60 (40) | 0.90 (0.36–2.21) | 0.81 | ||
| No | 62 (77) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Feces in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 30 (10) | 0.21 (0.04–1.00) | 0.05 | 0.14 (0.02–0.90) | 0.04 |
| No | 65 (117) | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| Handwash Station in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 69 (26) | 1.58 (0.57–4.42) | 0.38 | ||
| No | 60 (101) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Floor Permeability in Feeding Area | |||||
| Permeable | 73 (22) | 1.70 (0.55–5.25) | 0.36 | ||
| Nonpermeable | 60 (105) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Flies in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 54 (11) | 0.90 (0.41–1.98) | 0.81 | ||
| No | 62 (106) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Missing | 70 (10) | ||||
| Feces in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 60 (10) | 1.23 (0.31–4.90) | 0.76 | ||
| No | 62 (117) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Handwash Station in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 68 (19) | 1.70 (0.54–5.28) | 0.36 | ||
| No | 61 (108) | Ref | Ref | ||
RR: risk ratio; CI: confidence interval; Ref: reference.
Bivariate and multivariable generalized linear mixed models of food contamination risk factors and enteric pathogen diversity in infant weaning foods.
| Variable | Median (Range) Pathogen Types | Bivariate RR (95% CI) | Multivariable RR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food | |||||
| Porridge | 1 (5) | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| Milk | 3 (9) | 2.35 (1.67–3.29) | <0.001 | 2.35 (1.67–3.29) | <0.001 |
| Non-milk/porridge | 1 (5) | 0.76 (0.50–1.12) | 0.21 | 0.76 (0.50–1.12) | 0.21 |
| Container Type | |||||
| Covered | 2.5 (9) | 1.67 (0.92–3.00) | 0.09 | ||
| Thermos | 1 (5) | 1.59 (0.82–3.07) | 0.17 | ||
| Bottle/feeder/jug | 1 (4) | 1.41 (0.74–2.68) | 0.29 | ||
| Fresh | 1 (3) | 0.93 (0.43–2.03) | 0.86 | ||
| Uncovered | 2 (5) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Owning Animals | |||||
| Yes | 1 (9) | 1.29 (0.94–1.78) | 0.12 | ||
| No | 1 (5) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Keeping Animals Inside | |||||
| Yes | 1 (9) | 1.09 (0.76–1.57) | 0.62 | ||
| No | 1 (5) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Missing | Missing | Missing (Missing) | |||
| Sharing Containers | |||||
| Yes | 1 (9) | 0.66 (0.46–0.96) | 0.03 | ||
| No | 1 (5) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Floor Permeability in Preparation Area | |||||
| Permeable | 2 (5) | 0.95 (0.63–1.42) | 0.8 | ||
| Non-permeable | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Flies in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 1 (5) | 0.93 (0.64–1.35) | 0.7 | ||
| No | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Missing | Missing | Missing (Missing) | |||
| Feces in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 1 (4) | 0.68 (0.33–1.41) | 0.3 | ||
| No | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Handwash Station in Preparation Area | |||||
| Yes | 1.5 (4) | 1.29 (0.88–1.91) | 0.19 | ||
| No | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Floor Permeability in Feeding Area | |||||
| Permeable | 2 (5) | 0.99 (0.64–1.51) | 0.96 | ||
| Non-permeable | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Flies in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 1 (9) | 1.13 (0.73–1.75) | 0.58 | ||
| No | 1 (5) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Missing | Missing | Missing (Missing) | |||
| Feces in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 1 (4) | 1.31 (0.70–2.43) | 0.39 | ||
| No | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
| Handwash Station in Feeding Area | |||||
| Yes | 1 (5) | 1.27 (0.80–2.00) | 0.32 | ||
| No | 1 (9) | Ref | Ref | ||
RR: risk ratio; CI: confidence interval; Ref: reference.