The Livestock for Health Study: A Field Trial on Livestock Interventions to Prevent Acute Malnutrition Among Women and Children in Pastoralist Communities in Northern Kenya

BACKGROUND

Livestock-dependent communities in Africa's drylands disproportionately experience acute malnutrition, especially during drought seasons. We detail the design and implementation of the Livestock for Health (L4H) study aimed at determining the effect of providing livestock feed and nutritional counselling to prevent seasonal spikes of acute malnutrition.

METHODS

The L4H study employed a 3-arm cluster randomized controlled trial to compare households in pastoralist settings in northern Kenya receiving livestock feeds during critical dry periods, with or without nutritional counseling, with control households. Over 4 dry seasons, 2019 to 2021, the study collected data on household milk production, consumption patterns, mothers'/children's nutritional status, household socioeconomic status, herd dynamics, and human and animal health status every 6 weeks.

RESULTS

L4H recruited 1734 households, with 639, 585, and 510 households assigned to intervention arms 1 and 2 and control arm 3, respectively. From these households, 1734 women and 1748 children younger than 3 years were recruited. In total, 19 419 household visits were completed, obtaining anthropometric measures 9 times on average for each child and mother. Eighty-one households (5%) were lost from the study due to the mother's death, child's death, migration, and withdrawal for other reasons.

DISCUSSION

L4H's success in a challenging environment was possible due to strong community engagement, formative studies to inform trial design, collaboration with local authorities, and effective interdisciplinary collaboration. Subsequent manuscripts will report the study findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered October 29, 2020, and is online at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04608656).

Sero - epidemiology of brucellosis in people and their livestock: A linked human - animal cross-sectional study in a pastoralist community in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Brucellosis is associated with massive livestock production losses and human morbidity worldwide. Efforts to control brucellosis among pastoralist communities are limited by scarce data on the prevalence and risk factors for exposure despite the high human-animal interactions in these communities. This study simultaneously assessed the seroprevalence of brucellosis and associated factors of exposure among pastoralists and their livestock in same households.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in pastoralist communities in Marsabit County - Kenya. A total of 1,074 women and 225 children participated and provided blood samples. Blood was also drawn from 1,876 goats, 322 sheep and 189 camels. Blood samples were collected to be screened for the presence of anti-Brucella IgG antibodies using indirect IgG Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) kits. Further, Individual, household and herd-level epidemiological information were captured using a structured questionnaire. Group differences were compared using the Pearson's Chi-square test, and p-values < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Generalized mixed-effects multivariable logistic human and animal models using administrative ward as the random effect was used to determine variables correlated to the outcome.

RESULTS

Household-level seropositivity was 12.7% (95% CI: 10.7-14.8). The individual human seroprevalence was 10.8% (9.1-12.6) with higher seroprevalence among women than children (12.4 vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001). Herd-level seroprevalence was 26.1% (23.7-28.7) and 19.2% (17.6-20.8) among individual animals. Goats had the highest seroprevalence 23.1% (21.2 - 25.1), followed by sheep 6.8% (4.3-10.2) and camels 1.1% (0.1-3.8). Goats and sheep had a higher risk of exposure OR = 3.8 (95% CI 2.4-6.7, p < 0.001) and 2.8 (1.2-5.6, p < 0.007), respectively relative to camels. Human and animal seroprevalence were significantly associated (OR = 1.8, [95%CI: 1.23-2.58], p = 0.002). Herd seroprevalence varied by household head education (OR = 2.45, [1.67-3.61, p < 0.001]) and herd size (1.01, [1.00-1.01], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed evidence that brucellosis is endemic in this pastoralist setting and there is a significant association between animal and human brucellosis seropositivity at household level representing a potential occupational risk. Public health sensitization and sustained human and animal brucellosis screening are required.

Endemicity of Coxiella burnetii infection among people and their livestock in pastoral communities in northern Kenya

Background

Coxiella burnetti can be transmitted to humans primarily through inhaling contaminated droplets released from infected animals or consumption of contaminated dairy products. Despite its zoonotic nature and the close association pastoralist communities have with their livestock, studies reporting simultaneous assessment of C. burnetti exposure and risk-factors among people and their livestock are scarce.

Objective

This study therefore estimated the seroprevalence of Q-fever and associated risk factors of exposure in people and their livestock.

Materials and methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study in pastoralist communities in Marsabit County in northern Kenya. A total of 1,074 women and 225 children were enrolled and provided blood samples for Q-fever testing. Additionally, 1,876 goats, 322 sheep and 189 camels from the same households were sampled. A structured questionnaire was administered to collect individual- and household/herd-level data. Indirect IgG ELISA kits were used to test the samples.

Results

Household-level seropositivity was 13.2% [95% CI: 11.2–15.3]; differences in seropositivity levels among women and children were statistically insignificant (p = 0.8531). Lactating women had higher odds of exposure, odds ratio (OR) = 2.4 [1.3–5.3], while the odds of exposure among children increased with age OR = 1.1 [1.0–1.1]. Herd-level seroprevalence was 83.7% [81.7–85.6]. Seropositivity among goats was 74.7% [72.7–76.7], while that among sheep and camels was 56.8% [51.2–62.3] and 38.6% [31.6–45.9], respectively. Goats and sheep had a higher risk of exposure OR = 5.4 [3.7–7.3] and 2.6 [1.8–3.4], respectively relative to camels. There was no statistically significant association between Q-fever seropositivity and nutrition status in women, p = 0.900 and children, p = 1.000. We found no significant association between exposure in people and their livestock at household level (p = 0.724) despite high animal exposure levels, suggesting that Q-fever exposure in humans may be occurring at a scale larger than households.

Conclusion

The one health approach used in this study revealed that Q-fever is endemic in this setting. Longitudinal studies of Q-fever burden and risk factors simultaneously assessed in human and animal populations as well as the socioeconomic impacts of the disease and further explore the role of environmental factors in Q-fever epidemiology are required. Such evidence may form the basis for designing Q-fever prevention and control strategies.