4.3 Article

Going with the Flow: Legionellosis Risk in Toronto, Canada Is Strongly Associated with Local Watershed Hydrology

Journal

ECOHEALTH
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages 482-490

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10393-009-0218-0

Keywords

Legionella; Legionnaire's disease; water supply; environmental health; regression analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Legionella species are increasingly recognized as a cause of both healthcare- and community-acquired pneumonia (so-called Legionnaire's disease). These pathogens are ubiquitous in the environment, but environmental factors in the occurrence of sporadic legionellosis remain poorly understood. We analyzed all legionellosis cases identified in the Greater Toronto Area of Ontario from 1978 to 2006, and evaluated seasonal and environmental patterns in legionellosis case occurrence by using both negative binomial models and case-crossover analysis. A total of 837 cases were reported during the study period. After adjusting for seasonal effects, changes in the local watershed, rather than weather, were the strongest contributors to legionellosis risk. A 3.6-fold increase (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.4-5.3) in odds of disease was identified with decreasing watershed levels approximately 4 weeks before case-occurrence. We also found a 33% increase (95% CI, 8-64%) in odds of disease with decreasing lake temperature during the same period and a 34% increase (95% CI, 14-57%) with increasing humidity 5 weeks before case-occurrence. We conclude that local watershed ecology influences the risk of legionellosis, notwithstanding the availability of advanced water treatment capacity in Toronto. Enhancement of risk might occur through direct contamination of water sources or via introduction of micronutrients or commensal organisms into residential and hospital water supplies. These observations suggest testable hypotheses for future empiric 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

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available