4.2 Article

A cross-sectional approach including dog owner characteristics as predictors of visceral leishmaniasis infection in dogs

Journal

MEMORIAS DO INSTITUTO OSWALDO CRUZ
Volume 115, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FUNDACO OSWALDO CRUZ
DOI: 10.1590/0074-02760190349

Keywords

canine visceral leishmaniasis; risk factors; prevalence; cross-sectional study; serology

Funding

  1. FAPDF [193.000.867/2015]
  2. CNPq [142247/2015-4]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is relevant for human and animal public health. Several factors have been associated with the risk of Leishmania infantum infection in dogs. However, dog owner characteristics have been rarely explored. OBJECTIVES To estimate the prevalence and to identify the associated factors for VL infection including dog owners characteristics. METHODS A cross-sectional study was conducted including dogs from an endemic canine visceral leishmaniasis (CVL) region in the Federal District, Brazil. The infection was detected using parasitological, serological, and molecular methods. The associated factors were identified through Poisson regression modelling. FINDINGS The prevalence of infection was 26.25% [95% confidence interval (CI): 20.05 to 33.57]. The associated factors were: short coat prevalence ratio (PR) = 2.33 (95% CI: 1.02 to 5.22); presence of backyard with predominance of soil and/or vegetation PR = 4.15 (95% CI: 1.35 to 12.77); and highest gross family income score PR = 2.03 (95% CI: 1.16 to 3.54). MAIN CONCLUSION This is the first study that relates higher socioeconomic status of dog owners as an independent factor associated with higher prevalence of VL infection, along with other strongly associated factors related to receptive environment for phiebotomines. Our findings strengthen the need for exploration of the biological and behavioural bases linking dog owner characteristics to the risk of canine infection in prospective cohort studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available