Potential Risk Factors of Brucellosis in Dairy Farmers of Peri-urban Areas of South West Delhi

Seroprevalence and risk factor analysis of brucellosis among dairy farmers in Aligarh region, North India: creating awareness of a neglected disease

Introduction. Brucellosis, a globally distributed zoonotic disease, is caused by the Gram-negative bacteria known as Brucella. Humans acquire infection through direct contact with the blood, urine and placenta of animals, inhalation of dust or aerosols at infected animal farms, and raw milk and meat intake. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of brucellosis in dairy farmers in and around the Aligarh region of North India, to document various clinical signs and symptoms in Brucella-positive individuals, and to create awareness in dairy farmers concerning brucellosis and ways to prevent it. Methods. This was an observational study that included 125 dairy farmers in and around the Aligarh region. Serum samples were taken from this high-risk group after obtaining informed consent. Further, a pre-designed proforma was used to collect information about their knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) concerning brucellosis and assess the risk factors for the disease. The Rose Bengal test (RBT), serum agglutination test (SAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were performed to detect the seroprevalence of brucellosis. Result.Brucella infection was diagnosed in 64 (51.20 %) cases by indirect ELISA (IgM+IgG), 41 (32.8 %) by RBT and 4 (3.2 %) by SAT. Significant clustering of patients was seen in the 20-55 years age group. The most common symptoms in ELISA IgM-positive patients were joint pain (16.07 %), fatigue (14.28 %), anorexia (12.50 %), weight loss (8.92 %), malaise (5.35 %), undulant fever (3.57 %), night sweats (3.57 %) and headache (1.78 %). The findings of this study indicate that ELISA (IgM+IgG) exhibits great sensitivity as compared to SAT and RBT. KAP was very poor among dairy farmers. Conclusion. In India, Brucella is a frequent but severely underreported illness. ELISA is the most sensitive serological test for diagnosing brucellosis. No potential vaccine has yet been introduced for humans against brucellosis. Thus, it is necessary to impart awareness and sensitize high-risk groups concerning brucellosis.

Zoonotic Problems Reported by Sheep and Goat Farmers and Factors Potentially Contributing to the Occurrence of Brucellosis among Them

The study aimed to investigate the occurrence of zoonotic problems reported by dairy small ruminant farmers in Greece and to study potential associations with socio-demographic characteristics of the farmers and management practices applied in the farms. A countrywide investigation was performed in 325 sheep and 119 goat farms in the 13 administrative regions of Greece. The selected farms were visited and interviews were conducted with respective farmers. The occurrence of zoonotic problems in the farmers was recorded. A total biosecurity score (0−6) was devised, based on biosecurity practices followed in farms. Sixty-seven farmers (15.10%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 12.1−18.7%) reported experiencing a zoonotic problem. Most of the farmers (n = 57) (85.1%, 95% CI: 74.76−91.7%, of those with a zoonotic problem) (12.8%, 95% CI: 10.0−16.3%, of all) reported that the zoonotic problem had been brucellosis. Odds ratio for the occurrence of brucellosis in goat farmers was 1.879 (95% CI: 1.051−3.359) compared to the occurrence of the infection in sheep farmers (p = 0.033). For the outcome ‘occurrence of brucellosis’ in sheep farmers, the application of hand-milking, the availability of a separate lambing area and the presence of cats in the farm emerged as significant (p < 0.01); for the same outcome in goat farmers, only the availability of a separate kidding area emerged as significant (p = 0.001). The mean biosecurity score in farms in the continental area of the country was significantly higher than in the islands: 3.45 ± 0.05 versus 2.76 ± 0.28, respectively (p = 0.006), whilst there was also a significantly higher score in farms, where the farmer reported occurrence of brucellosis: 3.68 ± 0.15 versus 3.34 ± 0.06 in farms, where the farmer did not report such an incident (p = 0.042). In farms, where the above predictors prevail, farmers should be warned of an increased potential risk for human infection and biosecurity measures should be implemented and tightened.

Drivers of zoonotic disease risk in the Indian subcontinent: A scoping review

Literature on potential anthropogenic drivers of zoonotic disease risk in the Indian subcontinent is sparse. We conducted a scoping review to identify primary sources, published 2000-2020, to clarify what research exists and on which areas future research should focus. We summarised findings thematically by disease. Of 80 sources included, 78 (98%) were original research articles and two were conference abstracts. Study designs and methods were not always clearly described, but 74 (93%) were quantitative (including one randomised trial), five (6%) were mixed-methods, and one was qualitative. Most sources reported research from India (39%) or Bangladesh (31%), followed by Pakistan (9%), Nepal (9%), Bhutan and Sri Lanka (6% each). Topically, most focused on rabies (18; 23%), Nipah virus (16; 20%) or leptospirosis (11; 14%), while 12 (15%) did not focus on a disease but instead on knowledge in communities. People generally did not seek post-exposure prophylaxis for rabies even when vaccination programmes were available and they understood that rabies was fatal, instead often relying on traditional medicines. Similarly, people did not take precautions to protect themselves from leptospirosis infection, even when they were aware of the link with rice cultivation. Nipah was correlated with presence of bats near human habitation. Official information on diseases, modes of transmission and prevention was lacking, or shared informally between friends, relatives, and neighbours. Behaviour did not correspond to disease knowledge. This review identifies various human behaviours which may drive zoonotic disease risk in the Indian subcontinent. Increasing community knowledge and awareness alone is unlikely to be sufficient to successfully change these behaviours. Further research, using interdisciplinary and participatory methods, would improve understanding of risks and risk perceptions and thus help in co-designing context-specific, relevant interventions.