Q Fever Serological Survey and Associated Risk Factors in Veterinarians, Southern Belgium, 2013

Pozzo, Fabiana Dal; Martinelle, Ludovic; Léonard, Philippe; Renaville, B.; Renaville, Robert; Thys, Christine; Smeets, François; Czaplicki, Guy; Esbroeck, Marjan Van; Saegerman, Claude

doi:10.1111/tbed.12465

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The large majority of veterinarians consider biosecurity as a priority for their profession, although they do not consider their own safety to be at risk in their daily practice. This could represent a threat in terms of public health as seroprevalence for zoonotic diseases is usually significantly higher among rural veterinarians (Bernard et al., ; Dal Pozzo et al., ; Luce et al., ; Molineri, Signorini, Perez, & Tarabla, ). The survey highlighted weaknesses and margin for improvements, especially regarding bio‐exclusion (related to the risk of disease introduction) and biocontainment (related to the risk of inter‐herd disease transmission).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural veterinarian's perception and practices in terms of biosecurity across three European countries

Renault

Humblet

Moons

et al. 2017

Transbound Emerg Dis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of biosecurity measures in the animal health and production context is quite broad and aims at limiting the risk of introduction and spread of diseases. Veterinarians play a major role in biosecurity as key informants on the subject for cattle holders, key players in terms of disease prevention/control and eradication programs, as well as key risk factor in terms of disease dissemination. Many biosecurity studies have highlighted professional visitors such as veterinary practitioners as representing a high-risk factor in terms of disease introduction in animal facilities but, to date, very few studies have focused on the implementation level of biosecurity measures by veterinarians. An online survey was implemented in three European countries (Belgium, France and Spain) to assess the behaviour of rural veterinarians towards biosecurity, as well as their implementation level of the biosecurity measures. A descriptive analysis of data and a scoring system were applied to assess the implementation level of measures. The influence of different factors on the implementation level of biosecurity measures was investigated through a negative binomial regression model. The study identified different strengths, weaknesses, possible constraints and solutions in terms of veterinary perspectives. Veterinarians are considered as key informants by the farmers and could therefore play a more active role in terms of guidance and improvement of biosecurity at farm level. Based on the survey outcomes, two factors seemed to influence significantly the implementation level of measures: the country where he/she practices and the veterinarian's perception level of biosecurity. The biosecurity stages with the lowest application level, therefore representing the biggest threats, were bio-exclusion (increasing the risk of disease introduction) and biocontainment (increasing the risk of inter-herd transmission).

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural veterinarian's perception and practices in terms of biosecurity across three European countries

Renault

Humblet

Moons

et al. 2017

Transbound Emerg Dis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The C. burnetii seroprevalence among Dutch veterinarians in general was 65.1% and among livestock veterinarians was 69.2% in 2009 [9]. In Belgium, the prevalence estimates in similar study groups were, respectively, 45.4% and 58.3% in 2013 [47]. The relatively high prevalence of C. burnetii antibodies in Dutch and Belgian veterinarians is presumably caused by frequent contacts with infected animals [9,47].…”

Section: Risk Factor Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of animal species, including pets [32][33][34][35], horses [36,37], birds [38], wildlife, and arthropods (mainly ticks) [39][40][41][42], might also play a role in spreading C. burnetii.The main risk factors for human infection are direct or indirect contact with parturient ruminants [13,19,23,43] and traveling or working in areas where the pathogen is endemic [44][45][46]. Farm and abattoir personnel, along with veterinarians, are occupations considered to be at a higher risk of getting the infection due to the contact with animals [8][9][10]18,47,48]. The course of the infection depends on the genetic differences, origin, and virulence of the strain [49,50] and varies from an asymptomatic or flu-like disease to being fatal [13,23,51].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The course of the infection depends on the genetic differences, origin, and virulence of the strain [49,50] and varies from an asymptomatic or flu-like disease to being fatal [13,23,51]. Men are reported to be more likely to be found positive for antibodies against C. burnetii or to be diagnosed with Q fever [9,10,43,47,52]. Excretion of the bacterium via milk and faeces has been reported in humans [39].So far, there has been little information on Q fever's distribution and risk factors in North-Eastern Europe [12,53].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coxiella burnetii Antibody Prevalence and Risk Factors of Infection in the Human Population of Estonia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Q fever is an emerging health problem in both humans and animals. To estimate the prevalence of Coxiella burnetii (C. burnetii) antibodies in the Estonian population, we analyzed plasma samples from 1000 individuals representing the general population and 556 individual serum samples from five population groups potentially at a higher risk (veterinary professionals, dairy cattle, beef cattle, and small ruminant stockbreeders and hunters). Additionally, 118 dairy cow bulk tank milk samples were analyzed to establish the infection status of the dairy cattle herds and the participating dairy cattle keepers. Questionnaires were used to find the potential risk factors of exposure. The effects of different variables were evaluated using binary logistic regression analysis and mixed-effects logistic analysis. The prevalence in veterinary professionals (9.62%; p = 0.003) and dairy cattle farmers (7.73%; p = 0.047) was significantly higher than in the general population (3.9%). Contact with production animals in veterinary practice and being a dairy stockbreeder in C. burnetii positive farms were risk factors for testing C. burnetii seropositive (p = 0.038 and p = 0.019, respectively). Results suggest that C. burnetii is present in Estonia and the increased risk of infection in humans is associated with farm animal contact.Microorganisms 2019, 7, 629 2 of 12 estimates should be compared with caution as different approaches to determine seropositivity for Coxiella burnetii infection have been used in these studies. In most studies, indirect immunofluorescent assay (IFA) [2,3,7,11] or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) [4,13] has been used, and less frequently the complement fixation test (CFT) [13]. The IFA has been shown to be the most sensitive and specific test for C. burnetii antibody detection, but since IFA testing is more laborious, combining ELISA as a primary screening test and IFA as a confirmatory test has been suggested for large-scale population studies [14].Domestic ruminants are considered one of the main infection sources for humans [13,[15][16][17][18][19][20]. The infection transmits to humans mainly through the inhalation of aerosols containing C. burnetii [13,15,19,21] or via direct contact with infected animals [22,23]. In lactating animals, the bacterium is excreted in the milk [24][25][26], and consuming unpasteurized goat's milk, cow's milk, or raw milk products is a risk factor for acquiring the infection [18,23,27]. Coxiella burnetii produces small spore-like forms [28] that enable the pathogen to survive in the environment for long periods of time [29,30]. Some environmental and meteorological conditions increase the risk of infection, such as higher wind speeds, soil, and landscapes being more sensitive to wind erosion and low rainfall [15,21,31]. A number of animal species, including pets [32][33][34][35], horses [36,37], birds [38], wildlife, and arthropods (mainly ticks) [39][40][41][42], might also play a role in spreading C. burnetii.The main risk factors for human infection are dire...

show abstract

“…Many studies were conducted to identify, recommend and prioritize the BSM to be implemented in dairy, beef or veal calves farms (Mee, Geraghty, O’Neill, & More, ). Previous works highlighted the risk ratios of several infectious diseases related to the non‐implementation of BSM to justify and promote their implementation (Agger, Priou, Huda, & Aagaard, ; Bessell, Orton, White, Hutchings, & Kao, ; Bruun, Ersbøll, & Alban, ; Dal Pozzo et al, ; Giuliodori et al, ; Guta et al, ; Holzhauer, Hardenberg, Bartels, & Frankena, ; Kuster et al, ; Nusinovici, Frössling, Widgren, Beaudeau, & Lindberg, ; Ryan, Leonard, O’Grady, Doherty, & More, ). Yet, these studies are usually measure‐ or disease‐specific and lack a more holistic approach regarding the possible benefits of BS on health and production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pilot study assessing the possible benefits of a higher level of implementation of biosecurity measures on farm productivity and health status in Belgian cattle farms

Renault

Lomba²,

Delooz³

et al. 2019

Transbound Emerg Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last few years, the interest of decision‐makers and control agencies in biosecurity (BS), aiming at preventing and controlling the introduction and spread of infectious diseases, has considerably increased. Nevertheless, previous studies highlighted a low implementation level of biosecurity measures (BSM), especially in cattle farms; different reasons were identified such as perceived costs, utility, importance, increased workload and lack of knowledge. In order to convince cattle farmers to adopt BSM, it is necessary to gather more information and evidence on their cost‐effectiveness and their importance or utility in terms of disease prevention and control. The objectives of this study were to determine whether the farm or farmers’ profile correlated with the implementation level of BSM and if there was a positive correlation between the BSM implementation and the farm production and health parameters. Data were collected through face‐to‐face interviews conducted in 100 Belgian farms as part of a stratified and randomized survey. The Regional Animal Health Services provided the farm health status and production data. A general BS score and five sub‐scores related to the five BS compartments (bio‐exclusion, bio‐compartmentation, bio‐containment, bio‐prevention and bio‐preservation) were calculated for each farm based on the implementation level of different BSM grouped in 16 domains. The study highlighted a significant and negative correlation between the mortality rates in adult cattle (over 24 months of age) and young calves (aged 0–7 days) and different BS compartment scores. The study also demonstrated that the farms having a higher general BS score were indeed more likely to have a BVD‐free status. These evidence‐based findings are encouraging as they demonstrate the benefits of implementing BSM and could promote their adoption by farmers.

show abstract

Q Fever Serological Survey and Associated Risk Factors in Veterinarians, Southern Belgium, 2013

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Rural veterinarian's perception and practices in terms of biosecurity across three European countries

Rural veterinarian's perception and practices in terms of biosecurity across three European countries

Coxiella burnetii Antibody Prevalence and Risk Factors of Infection in the Human Population of Estonia

Pilot study assessing the possible benefits of a higher level of implementation of biosecurity measures on farm productivity and health status in Belgian cattle farms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About