Seroprevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi in Belgian forestry workers and associated risk factors.

BACKGROUND: As forest is the preferred environment for ticks, forestry workers are exposed to tick bites and tick-borne diseases. We assessed the seroprevalence of anti-Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb) antibodies and investigated, using an integrated landscape approach, the individual and environmental factors associated with the seroprevalence of Bb in Belgian forestry workers, a high-risk group in Belgium. METHODS: A group of 310 Belgian forest workers was examined to assess the seroprevalence of anti-Borrelia IgG antibodies. Using principal component analysis and binary logistic regression, the jo... Mehr ...

Verfasser: de Keukeleire, Mathilde
Robert, Annie
Luyasu, Victor
Kabamba-Mukadi, Benoît
Vanwambeke, Sophie
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2018
Verlag/Hrsg.: BioMed Central Ltd.
Schlagwörter: Belgium / Borrelia burgdorferi / Exposed groups / Forestry workers / Lyme disease / Risk / Serology / Seroprevalence / Tick
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26495465
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/197720

BACKGROUND: As forest is the preferred environment for ticks, forestry workers are exposed to tick bites and tick-borne diseases. We assessed the seroprevalence of anti-Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb) antibodies and investigated, using an integrated landscape approach, the individual and environmental factors associated with the seroprevalence of Bb in Belgian forestry workers, a high-risk group in Belgium. METHODS: A group of 310 Belgian forest workers was examined to assess the seroprevalence of anti-Borrelia IgG antibodies. Using principal component analysis and binary logistic regression, the joint effects of individual characteristics and environmental characteristics were examined. RESULTS: Sixty-seven of the 310 workers were seropositive for Lyme disease (LD), leading to a seroprevalence of 21.6%. The seroprevalence was higher among forest workers visiting forests more frequently (P = 0.003) or who reported over 100 tick bites (P-value < 0.001). The intensity of tick bites and the use of protection measures against tick bites have a positive impact on LD seroprevalence while the quantity of shadow from trees at ground level had a negative one. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that forest workers are a population at risk for LD and, by extension, at risk for various tick-borne diseases. In addition to the role of the environment, our results also showed the importance of considering exposure when predicting the risk of infection by Bb.