| Literature DB >> 36068597 |
Gilles Bourgoin1,2, Marie-Pierre Callait-Cardinal1,2, Emilie Bouhsira3, Bruno Polack4, Patrick Bourdeau5, Clarisse Roussel Ariza6, Lisa Carassou6, Emmanuel Lienard3, Jason Drake7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The local distribution of helminths in dogs and cats and the evaluation of risk of contamination represent an important challenge for veterinarians due to their effects on animal health and their potential zoonotic risk. The overall goal of this study was to estimate the prevalence of the digestive and respiratory helminths infecting client-owned dogs and cats in France.Entities:
Keywords: Cestodes; Companion animals; Deworming; Internal parasites; Nematodes; Risk factors
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36068597 PMCID: PMC9446561 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-022-05368-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 4.047
Sample sizes and apparent prevalence of each variable and modalities for dogs and cats, with the results of univariate statistics on apparent prevalence of all helminth’s species
| Variables/Modalities | Dogs | Cats | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apparent prevalence (%) | [95% CI] | Apparent prevalence (%) | [95% CI] | |||||
| ≤ 6 months | 85 | 29.4 | [20.1–40.3] | *** | 58 | 34.5 | [22.5–48.1] | *** |
| 6–24 months | 110 | 16.4 | [10.0–24.6] | 163 | 18.4 | [12.8–25.2] | ||
| > 24 months | 219 | 9.1 | [5.7–13.8] | 204 | 5.9 | [3.1–10.0] | ||
| Male | 213 | 12.7 | [8.5–17.9] | NS | 196 | 13.8 | [9.3–19.4] | NS |
| Female | 201 | 17.9 | [12.9–23.9] | 229 | 15.3 | [10.9–20.6] | ||
| Intact | 183 | 14.8 | [10.0–20.7] | 104 | 22.1 | 14.6–31.3] | *** | |
| Neutered/spayed | 146 | 7.5 | [3.8–13.1] | 263 | 7.2 | [4.4–11.1] | ||
| Number of conspecific | ||||||||
| - 0 | 262 | 13.0 | [9.2–17.7] | NS | 228 | 11.8 | [7.9–16.8] | NS |
| - 1 or 2 | 128 | 18.0 | [11.7–25.7] | 147 | 17.0 | [11.3–24.1] | ||
| - 3 or more | 24 | 25.0 | [9.8–46.7] | 47 | 19.1 | [9.1–33.3] | ||
| - NA | 3 | |||||||
| Number of other dogs and cats | ||||||||
| - No | 174 | 12.6 | [8.1–18.5] | 174 | 13.2 | [8.6–19.2] | * | |
| - 1 or 2 | 169 | 13.6 | [8.8–19.7] | 178 | 11.8 | [7.5–17.5] | ||
| - 3 or more | 70 | 24.3 | [14.8–36.0] | 70 | 24.3 | [14.8–36.0] | ||
| -NA | 1 | 3 | ||||||
| Kibbles/wet only | 278 | 15.5 | [11.4–20.3] | NS | 347 | 12.4 | [9.1–16.3] | * |
| Kibbles/wet + extra | 120 | 15.0 | [9.1–22.7] | 61 | 21.3 | [11.9–33.7] | ||
| Homemade incuding raw meat | 16 | 12.5 | [1.6–38.3] | 16 | 31.3 | [11.0–58.7] | ||
| NA | 1 | |||||||
| Indoor | 202 | 6.9 | [3.8–11.4] | *** | ||||
| Outdoor in city | 63 | 15.9 | [7.9–27.3] | |||||
| Outdoor in countryside | 160 | 23.8 | [17.4–31.1] | |||||
| City | 152 | 6.6 | [3.2–11.8] | *** | ||||
| Countryside | 261 | 20.3 | [15.6–25.7] | |||||
| NA | 1 | |||||||
| Indoor | 17 | 5.9 | [0.1–28.7] | NS | ||||
| Outdoor limited | 211 | 15.6 | [11.0–21.3] | |||||
| Outdoor unlimited | 186 | 15.6 | [10.7–21.6] | |||||
| Pet | 383 | 13.6 | [10.3–17.4] | ** | ||||
| Hunting/herding | 31 | 35.5 | [19.2–54.6] | |||||
| 0% | 72 | 6.9 | [2.3–15.5] | * | ||||
| < 50% | 174 | 16.7 | [11.5–23.1] | |||||
| 50–100% | 131 | 14.5 | [9.0–21.7] | |||||
| 100% | 36 | 27.8 | [14.2–45.2] | |||||
| NA | 1 | |||||||
| Yes | 82 | 15.9 | [8.7–25.6] | NS | ||||
| No | 330 | 14.8 | [11.2–19.2] | |||||
| NA | 2 | |||||||
| 1–3 months ago | 148 | 13.5 | [8.4–20.1] | * | 100 | 10.0 | [4.9–17.6] | ** |
| 3–6 months ago | 116 | 14.6 | [8.8–22.4] | 93 | 12.9 | [6.8–21.4] | ||
| 6–12 months ago | 65 | 10.8 | [4.4–20.1] | 60 | 5.0 | [1.0–13.9] | ||
| >12 months / Never | 69 | 27.5 | [17.5–39.6] | 147 | 22.4 | [16.0–30.1] | ||
| NA | 16 | 25 | ||||||
CI Confidence interval, NA data not available, N Sample size
P-values: NS: not significant; ·: close to significant (P < 0.1);
*, **, ***Significant difference at P < 0.05, P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively
Samples and apparent prevalence for each helminth’s species in dogs and cats
| Helminth infection | Dogs | Cats | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| App. Prev. | [95% CI] | App. Prev. | [95% CI] | ||||
| N total samples | 414 | 425 | |||||
| Gastro-intestinal and cardio-respiratory nematodes | |||||||
| Eggs | 35 | 8.5% | [5.9–11.6] | – | – | – | |
| – | – | – | 48 | 11.3% | [8.4–14.7] | ||
| 0 | 0.0% | [0.0–0.9] | 1 | 0.2% | [0.0-1.3] | ||
| 7 | 1.7% | [0.7–3.5] | – | – | – | ||
| – | – | – | 0 | 0.0% | [0.0-0.9] | ||
| 18 | 4.3% | [2.6–6.8] | 0 | 0.0% | [0.0-0.9] | ||
| 11 | 2.7% | [1.3–4.7] | – | – | – | ||
| 1 | 0.2% | [0.0–1.3] | 0 | 0.0% | [0.0-0.9] | ||
| 2 | 0.5% | [0.1–1.7] | 4 | 0.9% | [0.3-2.4] | ||
| Larvae | 2 | 0.5% | [0.1–1.7] | – | – | – | |
| – | – | – | 3 | 0.7% | [0.1-2.1] | ||
| 1 | 0.2% | [0.0–1.3] | – | – | – | ||
| Gastro-intestinal cestodes (eggs and segments) | |||||||
| 2 | 0.5% | [0.1–1.7] | 8 | 1.9% | [0.8-3.7] | ||
| Taeniidae | 0 | 0.0% | [0.0–0.9] | 5 | 1.2% | [0.4-2.7] | |
| Co-infestations | |||||||
| Two or more parasites detected | 12 | 2.9% | [1.5–5.0] | 5 | 1.2% | [0.4–2.7] | |
| Both nematodes and cestodes | 1 | 0.2% | [0.0–1.3] | 4 | 0.9% | [0.3–2.4] | |
| All helminth's parasites | |||||||
Fig. 1Apparent prevalence and 95% confidence interval by age and reproductive status for dogs and cats
Model selection of mixed-effects models based on Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small sample size for testing the effects of different risk factors on parasitic infection in dogs and cats
| Response variable | Model | AICc | ΔAICc | Weighta | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dogs | Age + activity + LE + off-leash | 8 | 318.7 | 0.00 | 0.299 |
| Age + TSLD + activity + LE + off-leash | 11 | 319.7 | 1.01 | 0.180 | |
| Age + TSLD + activity + LE | 8 | 320.5 | 1.75 | 0.125 | |
| Age + LE + off-leash | 7 | 320.7 | 2.02 | 0.109 | |
| Age + TSLD + LE + off-leash | 10 | 320.9 | 2.22 | 0.098 | |
| Age + TSLD + LE | 7 | 320.7 | 2.02 | 0.109 | |
| Age + LE | 4 | 324.5 | 5.78 | 0.017 | |
| Age + activity + off-leash | 7 | 328.1 | 9.37 | 0.003 | |
| Age + TSLD + activity + off-leash | 10 | 328.1 | 9.42 | 0.003 | |
| Cats | |||||
| Age + LLE + food | 7 | 282.0 | 0.49 | 0.253 | |
| Age + LLE + TSLD | 8 | 282.7 | 1.14 | 0.183 | |
| Age + LLE + TSLD + food | 10 | 284.3 | 2.73 | 0.083 | |
| Age + LLE + NODC | 7 | 284.7 | 3.13 | 0.067 | |
| Age + LLE + food + NODC | 9 | 285.6 | 4.08 | 0.042 | |
| Age + LLE + TSLD + NODC | 10 | 286.0 | 4.43 | 0.035 | |
| Age + LLE + TSLD + NODC + food | 12 | 288.0 | 6.43 | 0.013 | |
| Age + food | 5 | 298.9 | 17.40 | 0.000 | |
| Age + TSLD + food | 8 | 299.2 | 17.69 | 0.000 |
Only the 10 first ranked models are presented. The final selected model is shown in with underlining
AICc (Akaike Information Criterion Corrected) for small sample size, LE living environment, LLE lifestyle/living environment, NODC number of other dogs and cats, TSLD Time since last deworming
aWeight Akaike weights
Model estimates of the selected models testing the influence of risk factors on parasitic infection in dogs and cats
| Response variable | Variable | β ± standard error | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dogs | Intercept | − 2.61 ± 0.41 | − 6.380 | *** |
| Age (≤ 6 months) | 0.85 ± 0.37 | 2.31 | * | |
| Age (> 24 months of age) | − 0.60 ± 0.36 | − 1.66 | ||
| Activity (hunting/herding) | 1.13 ± 0.43 | 2.61 | ** | |
| LE (countryside) | 1.15 ± 0.38 | 3.07 | ** | |
| Cats | Intercept | − 2.45 ± 0.34 | − 7.29 | *** |
| Age (≤ 6 months) | 0.90 ± 0.37 | 2.41 | * | |
| Age (> 24 months of age) | − 1.55 ± 0.40 | − 3.90 | *** | |
| LLE (outdoor access in the city) | 1.36 ± 0.48 | 2.84 | ** | |
| LLE (outdoor access in the countryside) | 1.67 ± 0.37 | 4.54 | *** |
Reference levels for each categorical variable: 6–24 months for Age; pet for Activity; 0% for the Time spent outside without a leash (off-leash);, for dogs, City for Living Environment (LE) and, for cats, indoor for lifestyle/living environment (LLE)
*, **, ***Significant difference at P < 0.05, P < 0.01, P < 0.001, respectively