| Literature DB >> 31883001 |
Liese Van Gompel1, Wietske Dohmen1, Roosmarijn E C Luiken1, Martijn Bouwknegt2, Lourens Heres2, Eri van Heijnsbergen1, Betty G M Jongerius-Gortemaker1, Peter Scherpenisse1, Gerdit D Greve1, Monique H G Tersteeg-Zijderveld1, Katharina Wadepohl3, Ana Sofia Ribeiro Duarte4, Violeta Muñoz-Gómez5, Jennie Fischer6, Magdalena Skarżyńska7, Dariusz Wasyl7, Jaap A Wagenaar8,9, Bert A P Urlings2, Alejandro Dorado-García1, Inge M Wouters1, Dick J J Heederik1, Heike Schmitt1,10, Lidwien A M Smit1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Slaughterhouse staff is occupationally exposed to antimicrobial resistant bacteria. Studies reported high antimicrobial resistance gene (ARG) abundances in slaughter pigs. This cross-sectional study investigated occupational exposure to tetracycline (tetW) and macrolide (ermB) resistance genes and assessed determinants for faecal tetW and ermB carriage among pig slaughterhouse workers.Entities:
Keywords: air; dermal exposure; faecal carriage; gloves; macrolide resistance; respiratory exposure; retail meat; tetracycline resistance
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31883001 PMCID: PMC9194797 DOI: 10.1093/annweh/wxz098
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Work Expo Health ISSN: 2398-7308 Impact factor: 2.779
General characteristics of the human slaughterhouse population and the human population included in the models.
| Characteristics | Full populationa ( | Population included in the modelsa ( |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | 76/476 (16.0) | 47/322 (14.6) |
| Smoking | 256/470 (54.5) | 177/319 (55.5) |
| Antibiotic use | 427/475 (89.9) | 291/324 (89.8) |
| Mean age | 39.0 (24.0–54.1) | 38.7 (25.0–54.0) |
| Job positionc | ||
| Black area: | ||
| Lairage, bleeding | 23/482 (4.8) | 23/327 (7.0) |
| Scalding to singeing | 26/482 (5.4) | 26/327 (8.0) |
| Clean area: | ||
| After singeing | 8/482 (1.7) | 8/327 (2.5) |
| Evisceration, pluck removal | 52/482 (10.8) | 52/327 (15.9) |
| Inspection, dressing | 79/482 (16.4) | 79/327 (24.2) |
| Cutting and deboning: | ||
| Cutting room | 60/482 (12.5) | 60/327 (18.4) |
| Deboning room | 79/482 (16.4) | 79/327 (24.2) |
| Other areas: | ||
| Cooling | 18/482 (3.7) |
|
| Organ area | 42/482 (8.7) |
|
| Other (e.g. office, facility, cleaning) | 95/482 (19.7) |
|
| Nationalities | ||
| Dutch | 77/482 (16.0) | 46/327 (14.1) |
| Polish | 186/482 (38.6) | 124/327 (37.9) |
| Romanian | 72/482 (15.0) | 55/327 (16.8) |
| Otherd | 124/482 (25.7) | 39/327 (11.9) |
| Unknown (missing) | 23/482 (4.8) | 13/327 (4.0) |
a N of the full (N in 2015 = 325, N in 2016 = 157) and model population (N in 2015 = 211, N in 2016 = 116) is an approximation of the size of the datasets used for the tetW and ermB (log10 copies) analyses before outlier removal. The tetW and ermB full and model datasets have 97.3% (full population) and 96.6% (model population) of all observations in common. Missings were excluded in the summary figures per variable.
b N = part of the population for whom a date of birth was available.
cIn total, around 24% of the workers worked in more than one area. Due to the targeting of workers from lairage to cooling in 2016, only four workers reported working in the cutting and deboning area (last position in the slaughter line) in 2016. n.a. = category not included in the models (gloves and carcass samples were not both available).
dE.g. Hungarian, Slovakian, and Portuguese nationalities.
Figure 1.Prevalence of tetW and ermB log10 copies per gram stool from slaughterhouse staff along the slaughter line. The slaughter line runs from left to right: categories ‘organs’ and ‘other’ are technically not part of the slaughter line. Stars (*) depict the mean tetW or ermB log10 concentrations at a specific job location along the slaughter line. A box represents the 25th (Q1) to 75th (Q3) percentile, the centreline depicts the median (Q2). Dots represent values larger or smaller than Q1 − 1.5 or Q3 + 1.5 times the interquartile range. x-axis: N (numbers displayed above the x-axis): The number of human faecal samples eligible for analysis after qPCR quality control per slaughter position for each gene target (tetW, ermB). x-axis labels: The following job positions are included per slaughter step: Lairage: stables, stunning area. Bleeding: hanging and bleeding of stunned pigs. Scalding: positions after carcass scalding and carcass dehairing, before carcass singeing. Singeing: positions after carcass singeing, before evisceration. Intestines: removal of intestines (evisceration). Pluck: removal of liver, lungs, heart, oesophagus, and tongue. Inspection: veterinary inspection platform. Dressing: dressing of carcasses, removal of fat, and diaphragm. Removal: removal of heads and spinal cords. Cooling: cooling, includes carcass cooling but also several other cooling units. Cutting: separate carcass cutting room (within the same building as the main abattoir). Deboning: separate deboning area (within the same building as the main abattoir). Packing: packing and preparing meat for transport. Organs: multiple separate ‘warm’ and ‘cold organ units’: e.g. working with hearts, kidneys, and/or livers in separate organ areas. Other: includes office, facility and cleaning staff, and all other staff not working at a fixed position along the slaughter line.
Figure 2.Bar plot (A): Percentage of tetW and ermB detects on pig carcasses and meat collected along the slaughter line (N = number of samples eligible for analysis after qPCR quality control). Boxplot (B): Total number of tetW and ermB log10 copies on carcasses along the slaughter line (N = number of samples > LOQ). A box represents the 25th (Q1) to 75th (Q3) percentile, the centreline depicts the median (Q2). Dots represent values larger or smaller than Q1 − 1.5 or Q3 + 1.5 times the interquartile range. The slaughter line runs from left to right.
Figure 3.Bar plot (A): Percentage of tetW and ermB detects on gloves worn by slaughterhouse staff along the slaughter line (N = number of samples eligible for analysis after qPCR quality control). Boxplot (B): Total number of tetW and ermB log10 copies on gloves worn by slaughterhouse staff along the slaughter line (N = number of samples > LOQ). A box represents the 25th (Q1) to 75th (Q3) percentile, the centreline depicts the median (Q2). Dots represent values larger or smaller than Q1 − 1.5 or Q3 + 1.5 times the interquartile range. Blue dotted lines represent the location of the cooling areas (including the carcass cooling) in the slaughter line. The slaughter line runs from left to right.
Figure 4.Total number of tetW and ermB log10 copies on air filters collected along the slaughter line (N = number of samples > LOQ). A box represents the 25th (Q1) to 75th (Q3) percentile, the centreline depicts the median (Q2). Dots represent values larger or smaller than Q1 − 1.5 or Q3 + 1.5 times the interquartile range. Blue dotted lines represent the location of the cooling areas (including the carcass cooling) in the slaughter line. The slaughter line runs from left to right.
Determinants for tetW and ermB log10 copies per gram human stool.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk factors | GMR [95% CI] | Adjusted GMR [95% CI] | GMR [95% CI] | Adjusted GMR [95% CI] |
| Environmental exposure variables | ||||
| Carcass (% detects per 10%) | 1.05 [0.9997, 1.10] | 1.004 [0.96, 1.05] | 0.99 [0.91, 1.08] | 1.01 [0.93, 1.09] |
| Gloves (% detects per 10%) | 1.07 [1.02, 1.13]a | 1.01 [0.95, 1.08] | 1.005 [0.92, 1.09] | 0.98 [0.89, 1.08] |
| Job position | ||||
| Black area | 1.91 [1.25, 2.92]a | 1.23 [0.76, 1.97] | 0.93 [0.46, 1.88] | 1.01 [0.48, 2.14] |
| Clean area | 1.41 [1.04, 1.90]a | 1.15 [0.81, 1.64] | 1.03 [0.63, 1.69] | 0.94 [0.54, 1.63] |
| Cutting and deboning |
|
|
|
|
| Potential covariates and confounders | ||||
| Gender | 1.23 [0.83, 1.82] | 1.09 [0.75, 1.58] | 0.60 [0.32, 1.14] | 0.61 [0.34, 1.10] |
| Smoking | 0.59 [0.45, 0.78]a | 0.61 [0.47, 0.80]a | 0.71 [0.45, 1.12] | 0.59 [0.38, 0.89]a |
| Age | 1.02 [1.01, 1.03]a | 1.004 [0.99, 1.02] | 1.01 [0.99, 1.03] | 1.00 [0.98, 1.02] |
| Antibiotic use | 1.12 [0.71, 1.76] | 1.17 [0.76, 1.80] | 0.87 [0.41, 1.86] | 1.11 [0.56, 2.20] |
| Nationalities | ||||
| Dutch |
|
|
|
|
| Polish | 0.44 [0.28, 0.67]a | 0.51 [0.32, 0.81]a | 2.23 [1.15, 4.32]a | 2.31 [1.12, 4.73]a |
| Romanian | 0.43 [0.26, 0.71]a | 0.47 [0.27, 0.81]a | 0.19 [0.09, 0.41]a | 0.19 [0.08, 0.44]a |
| Other | 0.33 [0.21, 0.52]a | 0.41 [0.25, 0.66]a | 0.85 [0.42, 1.71] | 0.88 [0.41, 1.88] |
| Unknown | 0.35 [0.15, 0.85]a | 0.48 [0.20, 1.15] | 3.41 [0.83, 13.96] | 4.69 [1.14, 19.27]a |
| Sampling year | 1.81 [1.36, 2.41]a | 1.86 [1.32, 2.63]a | 1.87 [1.17, 3.01]a | 2.24 [1.32, 3.80]a |
Unadjusted and adjusted regression coefficients are expressed as geometric mean ratios (GMRs). Three models were fitted per gene (tetW, ermB) including either carcass (JEM), gloves (JEM), or job position. These models were then adjusted for all potential covariates or confounders (gender, smoking, age, antibiotic use, nationality, sampling year). Adjusted estimates and CIs from the latter variables are shown from the model including gloves (JEM). No major differences were observed between these estimates and estimates from models including carcass (JEM) or job position.
a P values < 0.05. All numbers are rounded at two figures or the first integer behind the comma unless rounding would result in the misinterpretation of a non-significant effect.
bThis category was taken as the reference category in the regression analysis.
cAntibiotic use was recorded as (potential) antibiotic use in the past year before sampling. A sensitivity analysis showed no major differences between the inclusion or exclusion of potential antibiotic users. For each model (tetW/ermB), three outliers were removed based on the outcome of model diagnostics. A sensitivity analysis showed no major differences between the inclusion or exclusion of outliers.