Bovine brucellosis in Gauteng, South Africa : seroprevalence amongst cattle handlers and variables associated with seropositive cattle herds, 2014–2016

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Govindasamy, K.
dc.contributor.author Thompson, P.N. (Peter N.)
dc.contributor.author Harris, Bernice Nerine
dc.contributor.author Rossouw, Jennifer
dc.contributor.author Abernethy, D.A. (Darrell)
dc.contributor.author Etter, Eric Marcel Charles
dc.date.accessioned 2022-10-06T10:02:37Z
dc.date.available 2022-10-06T10:02:37Z
dc.date.issued 2021-11-26
dc.description.abstract In South Africa, the prevalence of cattle handler exposure to Brucella on cattle farms is unknown and risk factors and cattle symptoms associated with infected cattle herds are unavailable. To address this gap, a case-control study of cattle herds was conducted in Gauteng province and farm workers and veterinary officials were tested for exposure to Brucella. Seroprevalence amongst farm workers exposed to case herds ranged from 4.0% (BrucellaCapt®) to 16.7% (IgG ELISA®), compared to those exposed to control herds, where seroprevalence ranged from 1.9% (BrucellaCapt®) to 5.7% (IgG ELISA®). Seroprevalence amongst veterinary officials was significantly greater compared to farm workers exposed to case herds for the outcome RBT+ IgM- IgG+ (OR = 11.1, 95% CI: 2.5–49.9, p = 0.002) and RBT- IgM- IgG+ (OR = 6.3, 95% CI: 2.3–17.3, p < 0.001). Risk factors associated with being an infected herd were: being a government-sponsored farm vs. private farm (OR 4.0; 95% CI: 1.4–11.3; p = 0.009), beef vs. dairy herd (OR 7.9; 95% CI: 1.4–44.9; p = 0.020), open vs. closed herd (OR 3.3; 95% CI: 1.1–10.4; p = 0.038) and the presence of antelope on the farm (OR 29.4; 95% CI: 4.0–218.2; p = 0.001). Abortions (OR = 5.1; 95% CI: 2.0–13.3; p < 0.001), weak calves in the herd (OR = 8.0; 95% CI: 2.6–24.4; p < 0.001), reduction in number of calves born (OR = 9.0; 95% CI: 2.1–43.6; p < 0.001), reduction in conception rate (OR = 3.9; 95% CI: 0.8–18.3; p = 0.046), hygromas in cattle (p = 0.011) and farmers reporting brucellosis-like symptoms in their farm workers or in him/herself (OR = 3.4; 95% CI: 1.3–8.7; p = 0.006) were more likely to be associated with Brucella infected herds than control herds. This evidence can be used in strategic planning to protect both human and herd health. en_US
dc.description.department Centre for Veterinary Wildlife Studies en_US
dc.description.department Production Animal Studies en_US
dc.description.department School of Health Systems and Public Health (SHSPH) en_US
dc.description.librarian am2022 en_US
dc.description.sponsorship The University of Pretoria Animal and Zoonotic Diseases Institutional Research Theme (AZD IRT) and by the South African Health and Welfare Sector Education and Training Authority (HWSETA). The APC was funded by University of Pretoria. en_US
dc.description.uri https://www.mdpi.com/journal/pathogens en_US
dc.identifier.citation Govindasamy, K., Thompson, P.N., Harris, B.N., Rossouw, J., Abernethy, D.A. & Etter, E.M.C. Bovine Brucellosis in Gauteng, South Africa: Seroprevalence amongst Cattle Handlers and Variables Associated with Seropositive Cattle Herds, 2014–2016. Pathogens 2021, 10, 1547. https://DOI.org/10.3390/pathogens10121547. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2076-0817 (online)
dc.identifier.other 10.3390/pathogens10121547
dc.identifier.uri https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/87564
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher BioMed Central en_US
dc.rights © The Author(s) 2021. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. en_US
dc.subject Brucellosis en_US
dc.subject Cattle handler en_US
dc.subject Veterinary official en_US
dc.subject Seroprevalence en_US
dc.subject BrucellaCapt® en_US
dc.subject IgG ELISA® en_US
dc.subject IgM ELISA® en_US
dc.subject RBT® en_US
dc.subject B. abortus en_US
dc.subject Risk factor en_US
dc.subject South Africa (SA) en_US
dc.title Bovine brucellosis in Gauteng, South Africa : seroprevalence amongst cattle handlers and variables associated with seropositive cattle herds, 2014–2016 en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record