| Literature DB >> 35184770 |
Yan-Lin Niu1,2, Tong-Yu Wang1,2, Xiao-Ai Zhang1,2, Yun-Chang Guo3, Ye-Wu Zhang4, Chao Wang1,2, Yang-Bo Wu1,2, Jin-Ru Jiang1,2, Xiao-Chen Ma1,2.
Abstract
Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35184770 PMCID: PMC8931803 DOI: 10.1017/S0950268821002673
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Epidemiol Infect ISSN: 0950-2688 Impact factor: 2.451
Basic information on listeriosis cases and controls from 2018 to 2020 in Beijing, China
| Year | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reported cases | Perinatal | Pregnant and birth-giving women | 18 | 23 | 10 | 51 |
| Newborns | 3 | 7 | 2 | 12 | ||
| Non-perinatal | 29 | 29 | 13 | 71 | ||
| Total | 50 | 59 | 25 | 134 | ||
| Enrolled cases | Perinatal | Pregnant and birth-giving women | 18 | 21 | 1 | 40 |
| Newborns | 3 | 8 | 1 | 12 | ||
| Non-perinatal | 25 | 25 | 4 | 54 | ||
| Total | 46 | 54 | 6 | 106 | ||
| Excluded cases | Lose track | 4 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |
| Refused participation | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||
| Total | 4 | 4 | 3 | 11 | ||
| Enrolled controls | Perinatal | 20 | 29 | 3 | 52 | |
| Non-perinatal | 23 | 27 | 4 | 54 | ||
| Total | 43 | 56 | 7 | 106 | ||
| No matched controls | 0 | 1 | 16 | 17 | ||
| Response rate for cases | Perinatal | 100.00% | 96.67% | 16.67% | 82.54% | |
| Non-perinatal | 86.21% | 86.21% | 30.77% | 76.06% | ||
| Total | 92.00% | 91.53% | 24.00% | 79.10% | ||
| Response rate for controls | Perinatal | 95.24% | 96.67% | 25.00% | 82.54% | |
| Non-perinatal | 79.31% | 93.10% | 30.77% | 76.06% | ||
| Total | 86.00% | 94.92% | 28.00% | 79.10% | ||
Food-related risk factors for sporadic listeriosis in Beijing, China
| Consumption | Perinatal | Non-perinatal | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Controls | OR (95% CI) | Cases | Controls | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
| Raw vegetables | 34 (65.38%) | 38 (73.08%) | 0.84 (0.47–1.49) | 0.84 (0.46–1.54) | 34 (62.96%) | 33 (61.11%) | 1.11 (0.45–2.73) | 0.93 (0.26–3.27) |
| Cooked meat products | 34 (65.38%) | 34 (65.38%) | 1.00 (0.57–1.77) | 0.97 (0.54–1.76) | 34 (62.96%) | 33 (61.11%) | 1.10 (0.47–2.59) | 0.60 (0.18–2.07) |
| Raw aquatic products | 3 (5.77%) | 6 (11.54%) | 0.65 (0.20–2.07) | 0.56 (0.17–1.86) | 2 (3.70%) | 8 (14.81%) | 0.14 (0.02–1.16) | 0.16 (0.01–2.43) |
| Sushi | 7 (13.46%) | 7 (13.46%) | 1.00 (0.45–2.22) | 0.42 (0.13–1.33) | 3 (5.56%) | 6 (11.11%) | 0.25 (0.03–2.24) | 0.36 (0.01–10.26) |
| Fruit | 48 (92.31%) | 51 (98.08%) | 0.61 (0.22–1.68) | 0.89 (0.46–1.72) | 47 (87.04%) | 51 (94.44%) | 0.43 (0.11–1.66) | 0.38 (0.08–1.84) |
| Freshly prepared drinks | 13 (25.00%) | 14 (26.92%) | 0.95 (0.51–1.78) | 1.12 (0.62–2.03) | 7 (12.96%) | 5 (9.26%) | 1.50 (0.42–5.32) | 1.47 (0.27–7.84) |
| Ice cream | 21 (40.38%) | 17 (32.69%) | 1.18 (0.68–2.05) | 1.44 (0.71–2.90) | 10 (18.52%) | 7 (12.96%) | 1.50 (0.53–4.21) | 3.21 (0.63–16.35) |
| Chinese cold dishes | 36 (69.23%) | 34 (65.38%) | 1.09 (0.61–1.97) | 1.40 (0.68–2.87) | 31 (57.41%) | 17 (31.48%) | 2.75 (1.22–6.18) | 3.43 (1.27–9.25) |
| Western-style salad | 10 (19.23%) | 6 (11.54%) | 1.31 (0.66–2.61) | 1.61 (0.74–3.51) | 3 (5.56%) | 4 (7.41%) | 0.67 (0.11–3.99) | 1.76 (0.13–24.40) |
| Raw milk | 2 (3.85%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2.04 (0.50–8.39) | 0.84 (0.46–1.54) | 5 (9.26%) | 2 (3.70%) | 4.00 (0.45–35.79) | 2.94 (0.23–37.55) |
| Cheese | 10 (19.23%) | 5 (9.62%) | 1.41 (0.71–2.82) | 0.97 (0.54–1.76) | 7 (12.96%) | 5 (9.26%) | 1.40 (0.44–4.41) | 1.03 (0.18–5.79) |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Risk factors associated with living habits for sporadic listeriosis in Beijing, China
| Dietary habits | Perinatal | Non-perinatal | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Controls | OR (95% CI) | Cases | Controls | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
| Handling of poultry meat | ||||||||
| No | 17 (32.69%) | 22 (42.31%) | – | – | 18 (33.33%) | 26 (48.15%) | – | – |
| Yes | 35 (67.31%) | 30 (57.69%) | 1.71 (0.68–4.35) | 2.33 (0.48–11.40) | 36 (66.67%) | 28 (51.85%) | 2.00 (0.86–4.67) | 1.35 (0.59–3.10) |
| Hand washing after handling poultry meat | ||||||||
| Na | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – | 18 (33.33%) | 26 (48.15%) | – | – |
| Almost always | 26 (74.29%) | 25 (83.33%) | – | – | 26 (48.15%) | 16 (29.63%) | – | – |
| Often | 9 (25.71%) | 5 (16.67%) | – | – | 9 (16.67%) | 9 (16.67%) | – | – |
| Occasionally | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (3.70%) | – | – |
| Never | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – | 1 (1.85%) | 1 (1.85%) | – | – |
| Washing cutting boards after handling poultry meat | ||||||||
| Almost always | 22 (62.86%) | 24 (80.00%) | – | – | 29 (80.56%) | 16 (57.14%) | – | – |
| Often | 6 (17.14%) | 3 (10.00%) | – | – | 6 (16.67%) | 8 (28.57%) | – | – |
| Occasionally | 5 (14.29%) | 1 (3.33%) | – | – | 1 (2.78%) | 3 (10.71%) | – | – |
| Never | 2 (5.71%) | 2 (6.67%) | – | – | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (3.57%) | – | – |
| Separation of raw and cooked foods | ||||||||
| No | 30 (57.69%) | 13 (25.00%) | – | – | 24 (44.44%) | 12 (22.22%) | – | – |
| Yes | 22 (42.31%) | 39 (75.00%) | 0.15 (0.05–0.51) | 0.05 (0.004–0.67) | 30 (55.56%) | 42 (77.78%) | 0.33 (0.13–0.84) | 0.79 (0.37–1.66) |
| Handling of the cutting board after cutting raw meat | ||||||||
| Use without any processing | 2 (3.85%) | 5 (9.62%) | 0.80 (0.06–9.88) | 0.59 (0.01–62.32) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | –# | –# |
| Only wipe with a rag before use | 1 (1.92%) | 2 (3.85%) | 0.80 (0.06–9.88) | 0.32 (0.001–84.85) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (5.66%) | –# | –# |
| Rinse with running water only before use | 23 (44.23%) | 19 (36.54%) | 2.07 (0.74–5.81) | 0.93 (0.01–94.85) | 24 (45.28%) | 12 (22.64%) | 7.84 (1.66–37.01) | 1.16 (0.51–2.61) |
| Use the other side | 4 (7.69%) | 0 (0.00%) | –# | –# | 1 (1.89%) | 1 (1.89%) | 2.80 (0.11–71.62) | 0.92 (0.09–9.07) |
| Switch to another cutting board for cooked food | 17 (32.69%) | 26 (50.00%) | – | – | 23 (43.40%) | 35 (66.04%) | – | – |
| Continue to use after cleaning with detergent | 5 (9.62%) | 0 (0.00%) | –# | –# | 5 (9.43%) | 2 (3.77%) | 10.25 (1.18–89.27) | 1.67 (0.42–6.59) |
| Frequency of refrigerator cleaning | ||||||||
| <1 time/year | 21 (40.38%) | 9 (17.31%) | – | – | 18 (33.33%) | 17 (31.48%) | – | – |
| <1–2 times/year | 24 (46.15%) | 19 (36.54%) | 0.40 (0.12–1.35) | 0.23 (0.04–1.46) | 22 (40.74%) | 22 (40.74%) | 0.95 (0.39–2.33) | 1.26 (0.60–2.63) |
| <3–5 times/year | 5 (9.62%) | 12 (23.08%) | 0.21 (0.05–0.87) | 0.52 (0.08–3.25) | 8 (14.81%) | 9 (16.67%) | 0.82 (0.23–2.86) | 0.88 (0.22–3.53) |
| >5 times/year | 2 (3.85%) | 12 (23.08%) | 0.05 (0.01–0.45) | 0.20 (0.01–2.98) | 6 (11.11%) | 6 (11.11%) | 0.97 (0.21–4.50) | 0.88 (0.24–3.25) |
| Consumption of leftovers | ||||||||
| No | 25 (48.08%) | 30 (57.69%) | 21 (38.89%) | 21 (38.89%) | ||||
| Yes | 27 (51.92%) | 22 (42.31%) | 1.71 (0.68–4.35) | 1.66 (0.28–10.00) | 33 (61.11%) | 33 (61.11%) | 1.00 (0.38–2.66) | 0.45 (0.18–1.12) |
| Heating leftovers before consumption | ||||||||
| Na | 15 (28.85%) | 30 (57.69%) | – | – | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – |
| Almost always | 22 (42.31%) | 15 (28.85%) | – | – | 24 (57.14%) | 24 (72.73%) | – | – |
| Often | 5 (9.62%) | 2 (3.85%) | – | – | 14 (33.33%) | 4 (12.12%) | – | – |
| Occasionally | 5 (9.62%) | 5 (9.62%) | – | – | 1 (2.38%) | 5 (15.15%) | – | – |
| Never | 5 (9.62%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – | 3 (7.14%) | 0 (0.00%) | – | – |
| Banquet attendance | ||||||||
| No | 42 (80.77%) | 44 (84.62%) | – | – | 46 (85.19%) | 49 (90.74%) | – | – |
| Yes | 10 (19.23%) | 8 (15.38%) | 1.29 (0.48–3.45) | 1.15 (0.28–4.67) | 8 (14.81%) | 5 (9.26%) | 1.60 (0.52–4.89) | 0.64 (0.24–1.72) |
| History of contact with live poultry | ||||||||
| No | 50 (96.15%) | 50 (96.15%) | – | – | 45 (83.33%) | 52 (96.30%) | – | – |
| Yes | 2 (3.85%) | 2 (3.85%) | 1.00 (0.14–7.10) | 0.35 (0.02–7.03) | 9 (16.67%) | 2 (3.70%) | 4.50 (0.97–20.83) | 1.65 (0.58–4.74) |
| Pet ownership | ||||||||
| No | 46 (88.46%) | 47 (90.38%) | – | – | 36 (66.67%) | 48 (88.89%) | – | – |
| Yes | 6 (11.54%) | 5 (9.62%) | 1.20 (0.37–3.93) | 0.58 (0.07–4.97) | 18 (33.33%) | 6 (11.11%) | 4.00 (1.34–11.96) | 1.31 (0.59–2.92) |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Reference group in the model.
Credible estimates can not be obtained due to the limited sample size.