| Literature DB >> 34065745 |
Betrand Msemwa1, Mariam M Mirambo2, Vitus Silago2, Juma M Samson2, Khadija S Majid3, Ginethon Mhamphi4, Joseph Genchwere5, Subira S Mwakabumbe6, Elifuraha B Mngumi7, Georgies Mgode4, Stephen E Mshana2.
Abstract
This study investigated seroepidemiology of Leptospira serovars among the dog keepers and their dogs in the city of Mwanza, Tanzania. A total of 205 dog keepers and 414 dogs were tested for Leptospira antibodies using a microscopic agglutination test (MAT). The median age of the dog keepers was 26 (inter quartile range (IQR): 17-40) years and median duration of keeping dogs was 36 (IQR: 24-120) months. The seropositivity of Leptospira antibodies was (33/205 (16.1%, 95% CI: 11.0-21.1) among dog keepers and (66/414 (15.9%, 95% CI: 12.4-19.4) among dogs, p = 0.4745. Among the serovars tested (Sokoine, Grippotyphosa, Kenya, Pomona and Hebdomadis), the most prevalent serovar was Sokoine in both dog keepers and their dogs (93.9% (31/33) vs. and 65.1% (43/66), p = 0.009). Thirty-one out of thirty-three seropositive dog keepers (93.9%) had dogs positive for Leptospira antibodies with 28 (84.9%) having similar serovars with their respective seropositive dogs. Having tertiary education (AOR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.07-0.84, p = 0.026) independently protected individuals from being Leptospira seropositive. More than three quarters of dog keepers had similar serovars as their dogs, necessitating one health approach to control measures in endemic areas.Entities:
Keywords: Leptospira antibodies; Mwanza; microscopic agglutination (MAT); serovar Sokoine; zoonotic disease
Year: 2021 PMID: 34065745 PMCID: PMC8156512 DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10050609
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pathogens ISSN: 2076-0817
Species, serogroups, serovars and strains used in MAT for the dog keepers and their dogs in Mwanza, Tanzania.
| Serial Number | Species | Serogroups | Serovars | Strains |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| Icterohaemorrhagiae | Sokoine | RMI-Cattle |
| 2 |
| Grippotyphosa | Grippotyphosa | Moskva-V |
| 3 |
| Pomona | Pomona | Pomona |
| 4 |
| Hebdomadis | Hebdomadis | Hebdomadis |
| 5 |
| Ballum | Kenya | Sh9-giant rats |
Sociodemographic characteristics of 205 dog keepers in Mwanza city.
| Participants’ Characteristics | Frequency/Median | Percent (%)/IQR |
|---|---|---|
|
| 26 | 17–40 |
|
| 36 | 24–120 |
|
| ||
| Male | 170 | 82.9 |
| Female | 35 | 17.1 |
|
| ||
| Urban | 103 | 50.2 |
| Rural | 102 | 49.9 |
|
| ||
| Married | 99 | 48.3 |
| Single | 106 | 51.7 |
|
| ||
| Primary | 133 | 64.9 |
| Secondary | 59 | 28.8 |
| Tertiary | 13 | 6.3 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 18 | 8.78 |
| No | 187 | 91.2 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 137 | 66.8 |
| No | 68 | 33.2 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 15 | 7.3 |
| No | 190 | 92.7 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 61 | 29.8 |
| No | 144 | 70.2 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 178 | 86.8 |
| No | 27 | 13.2 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 2 | 1.0 |
| No | 203 | 99.0 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 26 | 12.7 |
| No | 179 | 87.3 |
Seropositivity of different Leptospira serovars among dogs and their respective dog keepers in Mwanza, Tanzania.
| Serovars/Overall | Dogs (N = 414) | Dog Keepers (N = 205) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 66/414 (15.9%) | 33/205 (16.1%) | 0.475 |
| Sokoine | 43/66 (65.1%) | 31/33 (94.0%) | 0.001 |
| Pomona | 24/66 (36.3%) | Not done | N/A |
| Kenya | 7/66 (10.6%) | 0/33 (0.0%) | 0.026 |
| Grippotyphosa | 4/66 (6.0%) | 3/33 (9.1%) | 0.285 |
| Hebdomadis | 0/66 (0.0%) | 0/33 (0.0%) | N/A |
Figure 1MAT titers for Serovar Sokoine in Dogs and Dog keepers.
Factors associated with Leptospira seropositivity among dog keepers in Mwanza city Tanzania.
| Variables | Negative | Positive | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95%CI) | OR (95%CI) | |||||
| Median % (IQR) | Median % (IQR) | |||||
|
| 26 (17–40) | 24 (19–43) | 1.01 (0.99–1.04) | 0.322 | 1.0(0.98–1.03) | 0.316 |
|
| ||||||
| Female | 30 (85.7) | 5 (14.3) | 1 | |||
| Male | 142 (83.5) | 28 (16.5) | 1.18 (0.42–3.31) | 0.749 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Married | 84 (84.8) | 15 (15.1) | 1 | |||
| Single | 88 (83.0) | 18 (16.9) | 1.15 (0.54–2.42) | 0.722 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Primary | 116 (87.3) | 17 (12.8) | 1 | |||
| Secondary | 48 (81.4) | 11 (18.6) | 0.23 (0.10–0.80) | 0.129 | 0.42 (0.11–1.61) | 0.211 |
| Tertiary | 8 (83.9) | 5 (38.5) | 0.37 (0.68–0.80) | 0.021 | 0.25 (0.07–0.84) |
|
|
| ||||||
| Urban | 87 (84.5) | 16 (15.5) | 1 | |||
| Rural | 85 (83.3) | 17 (16.7) | 1.09 (0.52–2.29) | 0.825 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 17 (94.4) | 1 (5.5) | 1 | |||
| No | 155 (82.9) | 32 (17.1) | 3.51 (0.45–27.33) | 0.231 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 114 (83.1) | 23 (16.8) | 1 | 0.703 | ||
| No | 58 (85.3) | 10 (14.7) | 0.85 (0.38–1.92) | |||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 14 (93.3) | 1 (6.7) | 1 | |||
| No | 158 (83.2) | 32 (16.8) | 0.35 (0.45–2.27) | 0.322 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 123 (85.4) | 21 (14.6) | 1 | |||
| Yes | 49 (80.3) | 12 (19.7) | 1.43 (0.66–3.14) | 0.366 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 150 (84.3) | 28 (15.7) | 1 | |||
| Yes | 22 (81.5) | 5 (18.5) | 1.22 (0.43–3.48) | 0.714 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 2 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | ||||
| No | 170 (83.7) | 33 (16.3) | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Yes | 23 (88.5) | 3 (11.5) | 1 | |||
| No | 149 (83.2) | 30 (16.8) | 0.65 (0.18–2.30) | 0.501 | ||
* Wald test, Chi square = 8.71, p = 0.4643.