https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9569-1953
Figures
Abstract
Brucella spp. and Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) are classified as priority zoonotic agents in Kenya, based on their public health and socioeconomic impact on the country. Data on the pathogen-specific and co-exposure levels is scarce due to limited active surveillance. This study investigated seroprevalence and co-exposure of Brucella spp. and RVFV and associated risk factors among slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County, northern Kenya. A cross-sectional serosurvey was done in all 19 slaughterhouses in Isiolo County, enrolling 378 participants into the study. The overall seroprevalences for Brucella spp. and RVFV were 40.2% (95% CI: 35.2–45.4) and 18.3% (95% CI: 14.5–22.5), respectively while 10.3% (95% CI 7.4%-13.8%) of individuals were positive for antibodies against both Brucella spp. and RVFV. Virus neutralisation tests (VNT) confirmed anti-RVFV antibodies in 85% of ELISA-positive samples. Our seroprevalence results were comparable to community-level seroprevalences previously reported in the area. Since most of the study participants were not from livestock-keeping households, our findings attribute most of the detected infections to occupational exposure. The high exposure levels indicate slaughterhouse workers are the most at-risk population and there is need for infection, prevention, and control programs among this high-risk group. This is the first VNT confirmation of virus-neutralising antibodies among slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County and corroborates reports of the area being a high-risk RVFV area as occasioned by previously reported outbreaks. This necessitates sensitization campaigns to enhance awareness of the risks involved and appropriate mitigation measures.
Author summary
Brucellosis and Rift Valley fever are zoonotic diseases with significant public health and economic burden in Kenya. We investigated the levels of exposure to Brucella spp. and Rift Valley fever virus among slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County, northern Kenya. We found high exposure levels that are comparable to those previously reported within the community. Occupational exposure was the most probable source of infection since most of the workers did not keep livestock. Therefore, slaughterhouses could be targeted for sensitization on appropriate infection control measures besides being important points for disease surveillance.
Citation: Nyamota R, Maina J, Akoko J, Nthiwa D, Mwatondo A, Muturi M, et al. (2023) Seroprevalence of Brucella spp. and Rift Valley fever virus among slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County, northern Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 17(10): e0011677. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011677
Editor: Richard A. Bowen, Colorado State University, UNITED STATES
Received: March 17, 2023; Accepted: September 22, 2023; Published: October 5, 2023
This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This study was implemented under the project ‘Co-infection with Rift Valley fever virus, Brucella spp. and Coxiella burnetii in humans and animals in Kenya: Disease burden and ecological factors’ funded by Defense Threat Reduction Agency, (Grant No. HDTRA11910031 awarded to BB). The content of the information does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the federal government, and no official endorsement should be inferred. Additional funding was provided by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Fund Donors (https://www.cgiar.org/funders). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Slaughterhouse workers face many occupational health hazards including physical, chemical and biological hazards that are primarily from zoonotic pathogens [1,2]. Slaughterhouse workers may be exposed to zoonotic pathogens from handling potentially infected animal tissues and, inhalation of aerosolized infectious droplets [3,4]. Often, the risk of exposure is exacerbated by a lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) [4,5].
Brucellosis and Rift Valley fever (RVF) are two of the most common occupational zoonoses that slaughterhouse workers are exposed to in the sub-Saharan Africa [6–11]. In Kenya, the two diseases are ranked among the top five zoonoses due to their significant public health burden and associated economic impacts [12]. Brucellosis is endemic in most arid and semi-arid regions of Kenya, while RVF is an epidemic-prone disease that is associated with cyclic outbreaks every five to ten years in the country [13–18].
The two diseases present in a wide spectrum of syndromes in humans, posing significant challenges in their diagnosis, especially in remote, resource poor-settings where they are most prevalent [19,20]. Human cases of RVF might present clinically as febrile illnesses or as serious disorders including encephalitis, hepatitis, or retinitis [19,21]. Brucellosis mainly presents as an undulating fever with varying constitutional symptoms [22,23]. Both diseases are primarily transmitted to humans through contact with tissues from infected animals; this explains why slaughterhouse workers are classified into the most at-risk group of people [24,25]. The magnitude of zoonotic transmission is correlated with several factors including the disease endemicity in livestock populations, animal husbandry systems, hygiene, and forms of animal product consumption [26–28]. In most agrarian communities, animals with abortion symptoms, one of the main clinical presentations of infection with the two pathogens, end up being slaughtered owing to their reduced productivity [29]. This presents a significant risk of exposure among slaughterhouse workers.
This study investigated the seroprevalence of Brucella spp. and RVFV and associated risk factors among slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County in northeastern Kenya. Findings from the study would inform the development of prevention and control measures among the slaughterhouse workers in the area.
Materials and methods
Ethical statement
Ethical clearance was obtained from the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Institutional Research Ethics Committee (IREC), reference ILRI-IREC2021-24. The study background and objectives were explained to the study participants before written consent was obtained.
Study area
The study was conducted in Isiolo County, a low-lying arid and semi-arid region of northern Kenya. The area has a mean elevation of 1,145m above sea level and receives sparse annual rainfall amounting to 150–250 mm [30]. Isiolo County is sparsely populated with a population of 268,000 residents who mostly reside in rural areas [31]. Nomadic pastoralism is the main source of livelihoods in the area, with at-least 90% of residents directly depending on livestock for sustenance and economic wellbeing [32]. Isiolo also has game parks and reserves with significant populations of free-roaming wildlife.
Study population
The study population was slaughterhouse workers from all wards (administrative regions) of Isiolo County. Slaughterhouses were defined as establishments where livestock animals (cattle, camels, sheep, and goats) are slaughtered for consumption, and individuals working here were considered slaughterhouse workers [33]. Inclusion criteria were all slaughter facilities where animals are commercially slaughtered, ranging from small-scale slaughter slabs with limited mechanization to well-equipped facilities with advanced meat processing capabilities [34].
Sample size estimation
This study used a cross-sectional sampling approach where slaughterhouses and workers were considered as primary and secondary sampling units respectively. The minimum sample size (n) was derived using the Krejcie and Morgan formula for cross-sectional studies with finite population n = χ2NP(1-p)+d2(N-1)+ χ2(1-P) with a precision level (d) set at 0.05 and χ2 at 3.841 (table value of chi-square for 1 degree of freedom at the desired confidence level) [35]. A priori prevalence (P) of 50% was assumed for both Brucella sp. and RVFV and a population size (N) of 1000 which gave a minimum sample size of 278.
Sampling strategy and sample collection
All 19 slaughterhouses in various administrative wards in Isiolo County were identified and sampled during the dry season between 26th November to 2nd December 2021 (Fig 1). The slaughterhouses in this area were visited to determine the number of workers per slaughterhouse before sampling. Everyone who worked in a slaughterhouse at the time of sampling (work was defined as slaughter, butchering, flaying and any form of handling animal carcasses, slaughterhouse owners, transporters, inspectors, security guards, and cleaners) and gave consent for sampling and data collection was included in the study. The selected participants responded to questionnaires before being sampled. The data collected on the questionnaire included slaughterhouse name and its geographic coordinates, socio-demographic information (gender, marital status, education level, occupation, and age), physiologic parameters (body temperature, blood pressure, pulse rate, height, weight), animal husbandry practices, eating habits, occupational hazards encountered, occupational roles and occupational hygiene practices (use of personal protective equipment, cut hands, fluid splash).
The base map of Africa was created in R using the function ’wrld_simpl’ (Region 2) in the maptools package [36]. The base map shapefile for Africa was downloaded from: Natural Earth (http://www.naturalearthdata.com/). The Kenya counties shapefile was downloaded from: https://data.amerigeoss.org/dataset/47-counties-of-kenya/resource/11e8697c-48a9-4af5-85f9-f5a2b0625d2c. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution [4.0] License. The wards shapefile was downloaded from: https://data.amerigeoss.org/dataset/kenya-admin-level-3-wards/resource/2fe6fcaa-58af-4d5d-a17d-81c73574ae2a. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution [4.0] License.
Blood samples were collected through venous puncture by a certified clinician. Sera samples were collected in 4 ml plain vacutainers and barcoded. Sample barcodes and questionnaire data were collected using electronic forms designed with open data kit (ODK) application and data was uploaded to a centralized cloud-based server at International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). The samples were processed for serum in the same day of collection at the field laboratory and stored at -20°C, after which they were transferred to the ILRI laboratory in Nairobi for further testing.
Laboratory assays
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to screen the serum samples for anti-RVFV and anti-Brucella antibodies using validated commercial kits. Testing for RVFV was done using ID Screen RVFV competition multispecies ELISA kit (ID VET, Montpellier, France) [37,38], whereas Brucella assays were done using IBL-America IgG-ELISA kits (Minneapolis, MN) [39–41]. Both kits have been shown to have specificity above 98%, whereas the sensitivity of the RVFV and Brucella kits was 85% and 100%, respectively [42,43]. All assays were done as described by the manufacturers. The optical densities were recorded using a Synergy BioTek microplate ELISA reader (Synergy, BioTek, Winooski, VT, USA) at 405 nm for Brucella and 450 nm for RVFV. Seropositive samples for RVFV were subjected to Virus Neutralization Tests (VNT) [44] to confirm the presence of anti-RVFV antibodies. Briefly, the serum samples were heat inactivated at 56°C for 30 min. Two-fold serial dilution of the serum was then done in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS). The live attenuated Smithburn RVFV vaccine strain clone 13 (CL13T) was added into the diluted serum at 100 TCID50 per well and incubated at room temperature for 1 hour. This virus-serum mixture was added onto a confluent monolayer vero cells prepared at 2x104 cells/well and incubated at 37°C and 5% CO2 for three days. Afterwards, the cells were observed under an inverted microscope for cytopathic effect (CPE). Where CPE was not observed, the serum samples were considered to have virus-neutralizing antibodies and vice versa.
Statistical analysis
All the data analyses were done using R statistical software, version 4.22 [45]. The Brucella spp. and RVFV seroprevalence estimates and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using binconf function within the Hmisc package [46]. Exploratory analyses were done using the seropositivity status for each disease and the demographic factors as dependent and independent variables, respectively. The associations between dependent and independent variables were assessed by chi-square tests at a significance level of α = 0.05 level and further using univariable models. Multivariable analysis using outcome variables for each disease was done on independent variables whose univariable results had p-values of ≤0.2. Both univariable and multivariable analyses were done using the generalized linear mixed models with logit link functions. These were implemented in R using the glmer function within the lme4 package [47]. In these models, we fitted slaughterhouse as a random effects variable to account for the potential clustering of observations at this level. The significance of the fixed effects variable was evaluated using the Likelihood ratio test (at α = 0.05). For multivariable analysis, a backward selection procedure was used to build a parsimonious model from a full model that included all the variables that met the inclusion criterion (p≤0.2) mentioned above. The best-fitting model was determined by comparing all the possible maximal, minimal and null-intercept-only models using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The final model that gave the lowest Akaike information criterion (AIC) was selected. We extracted the variance estimates for random effects from the final models for each disease using the varCorr function in lme4 package. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were estimated from these models using the icc function in performance package [48]. Finally, we also calculated the 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the variance and ICC estimates via bootstrap simulation.
Results
Subject characteristics
We sampled 378 slaughterhouse workers comprising 136 (35.9%) females and 242 (64.0%) males from 19 slaughterhouses. The median number of workers sampled per slaughterhouse was 10 (range 2–150); their ages ranged from 18–75 years with a mean of 38.7 (95% CI 37.3–40.2). Eight years (range 0.1–50.1) was the average length of time spent working as a slaughterhouse worker. Of the recruited subjects, 39.2% primarily slaughtered and dressed carcasses, 33.1% were slaughterhouse owners, 19.6% were transporters, 2.9% were inspectors, while the remaining 5.3% classified as “others” comprised security guards, and cleaners (Table 1).
The test for statistical significance was done at α = 0.05.
Descriptive factors information
Despite most workers encountering fluid splash and 3% having open wounds, only a small proportion of them used personal protective equipment (PPE). Gumboots were the most frequently used PPE (33.6%) followed by aprons (27%) while a limited number used hand gloves (6.4%) and eye protection equipment (1.3%). Interestingly, handwashing was commonly practiced (78.0%) within the occupational environment. Most of the slaughterhouse workers had no formal education and lacked job-related training. A small proportion of the respondents 12.4% (47/378) owned livestock and a third of all the respondents undertook various animal husbandry roles that included cleaning, milking, and assisting in animal birthing besides working in the slaughterhouses. Over 96.0% of interviewed respondents consumed both meat and milk. Among these, 12.7% reported routine consumption of raw meat while none confirmed whether they consumed raw milk. More than 30.0% of the respondents reported to have had contact with ill animals and aborted material in the last three months. Finally, arthropod bites were reported by 28% of the respondents.
Brucella spp., and RVFV seroprevalence and associated risk factors
The overall seroprevalence for Brucella spp. and RVFV was 40.2%, (95% CI 35.2–45.4) and 18.3% (95% CI 14.5–22.5), respectively. Out of the 69 samples that were positive for RVFV by ELISA, 59 were confirmed to have anti-RVFV antibodies by VNT. There was no significant difference in RVFV seropositivity between male (16.5%, 95% CI 12.1–21.8) and female workers (21.3% 95% CI 14.8–29.2) χ2 = 1.0, p-value = 0.30). Likewise, the Brucella spp. seroprevalence between male (42.6%, 95%CI 36–49) and female (36.0%, 95%CI 28–45) workers did not vary significantly (χ2 = 1.3, p = 0.30). Moreover, 10.3% (95% CI 7.4%-13.8%) of the individuals tested positive for both anti-Brucella spp. and anti-RVFV antibodies. Arthropod bites did not significantly affect RVFV seropositivity (χ2 = 0.00, p = 0.96). The results for the association between various independent variables for Brucella spp. and RVFV seroprevalence are also presented in Table 1. However, we also observed a significantly higher seropositivity of RVFV among individuals who did not use PPE compared to those who used them (χ2 = 4.18, p = 0.04). This was also observed for co-exposure with both diseases although not statistically significant (χ2 = 1.44, p = 0.23). None of the univariable and multivariable analyses were statistically associated with either Brucella spp. or RVFV seropositivity.
Discussion
This study reports the seroprevalence and co-exposure of Brucella spp. and RVFV and related risk factors amongst slaughterhouse workers from pastoral communities in Isiolo county. Interestingly, most of the respondents in our study were not from livestock-keeping households and thus exposure to Brucella spp. and RVFV is likely to be occupational. This corroborates previous studies that have reported Isiolo to be a high-risk area for Brucella spp. and RVFV infections. Our findings on age and sex concur with previous human demographics reports from slaughterhouse workers [9,10,49,50]. This implies young male workers to be the more susceptible group that commonly work in slaughterhouses. However, there was no association between subject-level variable and either Brucella spp. or RVFV seropositivity [10]. This could be attributed to the fact that the slaughterhouse workers recruited for the study carried out multiple chores ranging from carcass dressing, evisceration, slaughtering and cleaning and hence they had similar levels of exposure. We also hypothesize that the inadequate biosafety and biosecurity measures that were being practised in the facilities presented multiple pathways through which most of the workers, irrespective of their personal characteristics and assigned chores, got exposed to the pathogens of interest.
The observed Brucella spp. and RVFV seroprevalence among slaughterhouse workers was comparable to previous community-level findings from the same region [15,51]. However, our findings on the seropositivity to both infections was not associated to the frequently mentioned risk factors, such as eating patterns and animal husbandry techniques [18,52]. Our findings are also comparable to other studies from Africa that did not find significant association for the risk factor variables and seropositivity for RVFV and Brucella in humans [9,37]. This could be attributed to the finite human populations sampled, the common and multiple exposures across the slaughter facilities where individuals routinely undertake multiple roles. This plausibly makes it difficult to correlate seropositivity to individual risk factors. Consistent with data from Tanzania, our findings shows that most workers were from non-livestock-keeping households, thereby suggesting occupational exposure within the slaughterhouses [50]. The overall co-exposure to both Brucella spp. and RVFV concurs with previous studies that reported co-exposure as a natural occurrence in livestock and wildlife in Kenya [14,53]. This implies possible human co-exposure to zoonotic pathogens with common clinical presentations which may lead to incomplete diagnosis of clinical syndromes. Detection of RVFV-neutralizing antibodies in a large proportion of the ELISA-positive individuals confirms human exposure to the virus in this region thereby corroborating the status of slaughterhouse workers as a high-risk group. Further investigations including the RVFV incidence within slaughter facilities would be beneficial in establishing the disease burden, strengthening the surveillance system, and assessing the suitability of slaughterhouse sampling sites in predicting RVFV epidemic cycles.
Failure to use PPE and performing multiple duties at a slaughterhouse were risk factors related with RVFV seropositivity, although not statistically significant. Some respondents also undertook other roles including animal husbandry, such as animal birthing, which could facilitate the transmission of zoonotic diseases. Our findings thus emphasize the significance of sensitizing slaughterhouse workers, considered a high-risk group, about infection control measures such as the use of appropriate PPE as recommended in previous studies [54,55]. Gumboots were the most often worn PPE in Isiolo, as reported in another study from Ugandan, however their effectiveness against Brucella spp. and RVFV could not be determined [56].
Inspectors and owners of the slaughterhouses had the highest exposure levels for RVFV, although this observation was not statistically significant. The plausible cause for this observation would be the numerous carcases the inspectors were expected to handle each day, thereby elevating their exposure to potentially infectious material. Despite more than 90% of the respondents consuming both milk and meat, this was not significantly associated with either Brucella or RVFV seropositivity. This suggests limited exposure to the infectious pathogen through this route for the slaughterhouse workers, this could be attributed to reported low prevalence of Brucella in milk [18]. This further corroborates our hypothesis of likely occupational exposure at the slaughterhouse since most sampled workers did not keep livestock. However, our results should be cautiously interpreted due to the skewed distribution of the individuals who consumed milk and meat (90%) with those who did not (10%) that may affect the statistical power to compare the two groups.
Our study, however, had a few limitations. First, subjects were self-selected at each slaughterhouse because only individuals that provided informed consent for the participation in the study were sampled. Ideally, a random process to select these subjects would have been used to obtain a representative study population and avoid biases due to self-selection. Secondly, the cross-sectional study design and the types of ELISA kits used (IgG) do not allow for the determination of new infections. It is therefore likely that cases observed included a large proportion of historical exposures which might have been acquired in other locations. Additionally, we lacked data on RVFV vector exposure in the research area and thus could not account for its effect on the observed RVFV seropositivity. Although the study focussed on humans, future ante- and post-mortem inspections of animals and collection of samples can also generate a lot of data for animal bio-surveillance.
In conclusion, we demonstrate that slaughterhouse workers in Isiolo County suffered relatively high levels of exposure to Brucella and RVFV mostly through routine occupational activities. Secondly, clinical cases observed among slaughterhouse workers should be urgently addressed since they could signify a bigger health challenge at the community level. To address the zoonotic diseases burden through a one-health approach, the government of Kenya established the zoonotic diseases unit (ZDU). One of the outputs has been the prioritization of key zoonotic diseases in Kenya [12]. However, data paucity owing to limited sustainable surveillance and diagnostic capacity in remote areas is a significant challenge to the implementation of comprehensive disease control measures in Kenya [57]. Given the high risk of infectious diseases in abattoir environments, our study demonstrates that slaughterhouses and slaughterhouse workers can be critical sentinel surveillance sites for priority zoonotic pathogens at the community level.
Acknowledgments
We thank all the workers and owners of the slaughterhouses that were used in the study for accepting to join the study. We also thank the public and animal health officials from the Isiolo County for approving the study to be implemented in their area. Similar appreciations go to the county medical team that helped with the sampling of the study participants.
References
- 1. Klous G, Huss A, Heederik DJ, Coutinho RA. Human–livestock contacts and their relationship to transmission of zoonotic pathogens, a systematic review of literature. One Health. 2016;2:65–76. pmid:28616478
- 2. Cook EAJ, de Glanville WA, Thomas LF, Kariuki S, Bronsvoort BMdC, Fèvre EM. Working conditions and public health risks in slaughterhouses in western Kenya. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):1–12.
- 3. De Boni L, Mall S, Msimang V, de Voux A, Rossouw J, Frean J. Exposure of South African Abattoir Workers to Coxiella burnetii. Tropical medicine and infectious disease. 2022;7(2):28. pmid:35202223
- 4. Rodarte KA, Fair JM, Bett B, Kerfua SD, Fasina FO, Bartlow AW. A scoping review of zoonotic parasites and pathogens associated with abattoirs in Eastern Africa and recommendations for abattoirs as disease surveillance sites. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1194964. pmid:37529427
- 5. Mostafavi E, Pourhossein B, Esmaeili S, Amiri FB, Khakifirouz S, Shah-Hosseini N, et al. Seroepidemiology and risk factors of Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever among butchers and slaughterhouse workers in southeastern Iran. Int J Infect Dis. 2017;64:85–9. pmid:28935247
- 6. Ekere SO, Njoga EO, Onunkwo JI, Njoga UJ. Serosurveillance of Brucella antibody in food animals and role of slaughterhouse workers in spread of Brucella infection in Southeast Nigeria. Veterinary World. 2018;11(8):1171. pmid:30250380
- 7. Amegashie EA, Owusu-Dabo E, Salifu SP, Awuah AA-A, Baffour-Awuah S, Addofoh N, et al. Seroprevalence and occupational risk factors for Brucella infection among slaughterhouse workers and butchers in Kumasi, Ghana. Journal of Epidemiological Research. 2017;3(1).
- 8. Kolo FB, Adesiyun AA, Fasina FO, Katsande CT, Dogonyaro BB, Potts A, et al. Seroprevalence and characterization of Brucella species in cattle slaughtered at Gauteng abattoirs, South Africa. Vet Med Sci. 2019;5(4):545–55. pmid:31414558
- 9. Madut NA, Ocan M, Muwonge A, Muma JB, Nasinyama GW, Godfroid J, et al. Sero-prevalence of brucellosis among slaughterhouse workers in Bahr el Ghazal region, South Sudan. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):1–7.
- 10. Mirambo MM, Mgode GF, Malima ZO, John M, Mngumi EB, Mhamphi GG, et al. Seropositivity of Brucella spp. and Leptospira spp. antibodies among abattoir workers and meat vendors in the city of Mwanza, Tanzania: A call for one health approach control strategies. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(6):e0006600. pmid:29939991
- 11. Cook EAJ, De Glanville WA, Thomas LF, Kiyong’a A, Kivali V, Kariuki S, et al. Evidence of exposure to C. burnetii among slaughterhouse workers in western Kenya. One Health. 2021;13:100305. pmid:34430697
- 12. Munyua P, Bitek A, Osoro E, Pieracci EG, Muema J, Mwatondo A, et al. Prioritization of zoonotic diseases in Kenya, 2015. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0161576. pmid:27557120
- 13. Racloz V, Schelling E, Chitnis N, Roth F, Zinsstag J. Persistence of brucellosis in pastoral systems. OIE Revue Scientifique et Technique. 2013;32(1):61–70. pmid:23837365
- 14. Muturi M, Akoko J, Nthiwa D, Chege B, Nyamota R, Mutiiria M, et al. Serological evidence of single and mixed infections of Rift Valley fever virus, Brucella spp. and Coxiella burnetii in dromedary camels in Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15(3):e0009275. pmid:33770095
- 15. Akoko JM, Pelle R, Lukambagire AS, Machuka EM, Nthiwa D, Mathew C, et al. Molecular epidemiology of Brucella species in mixed livestock-human ecosystems in Kenya. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8881. pmid:33893352
- 16. Njeru J, Nthiwa D, Akoko J, Oyas H, Bett B. Incidence of Brucella infection in various livestock species raised under the pastoral production system in Isiolo County, Kenya. BMC Vet Res. 2021;17:1–12.
- 17. Tigoi C, Sang R, Chepkorir E, Orindi B, Arum SO, Mulwa F, et al. High risk for human exposure to Rift Valley fever virus in communities living along livestock movement routes: A cross-sectional survey in Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14(2):e0007979.
- 18. Wainaina M, Aboge GO, Omwenga I, Ngaywa C, Ngwili N, Kiara H, et al. Detection of Brucella spp. in raw milk from various livestock species raised under pastoral production systems in Isiolo and Marsabit counties, northern Kenya. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2020;52(6):3537–44. pmid:32948966
- 19. Anywaine Z, Lule SA, Hansen C, Warimwe G, Elliott A. Clinical manifestations of Rift Valley fever in humans: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022;16(3):e0010233. pmid:35333856
- 20. Yagupsky P, Morata P, Colmenero JD. Laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019;33(1): pmid:31722888
- 21. Madani TA, Al-Mazrou YY, Al-Jeffri MH, Mishkhas AA, Al-Rabeah AM, Turkistani AM, et al. Rift Valley fever epidemic in Saudi Arabia: epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory characteristics. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37(8):1084–92. pmid:14523773
- 22. Megid J, Mathias LA, Robles C. Clinical manifestations of brucellosis in domestic animals and humans. Open Vet Sci J. 2010:119–26.
- 23. Roushan MRH, Ebrahimpour S, Moulana Z. Different clinical presentations of brucellosis. Jundishapur J Microbiol 2016;9(4).
- 24. González-Espinoza G, Arce-Gorvel V, Mémet S, Gorvel J-P. Brucella: Reservoirs and niches in animals and humans. Pathogens. 2021;10(2):186. pmid:33572264
- 25. Anyangu AS, Gould LH, Sharif SK, Nguku PM, Omolo JO, Mutonga D, et al. Risk factors for severe Rift Valley fever infection in Kenya, 2007. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2010;83(2 Suppl):14. pmid:20682901
- 26. Osbjer K, Boqvist S, Sokerya S, Kannarath C, San S, Davun H, et al. Household practices related to disease transmission between animals and humans in rural Cambodia. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):1–10. pmid:25952633
- 27. Barnes AN, Davaasuren A, Baasandagva U, Gray GC. A systematic review of zoonotic enteric parasitic diseases among nomadic and pastoral people. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0188809. pmid:29190664
- 28. Atherstone C, Mgode GF, Dhand NK, Alonso S, Grace D, Ward MP, et al. Selected endemic zoonoses in pigs presenting for slaughter in Kampala, Uganda. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2020;103(6):2552. pmid:33069266
- 29. Lancelot R, Béral M, Rakotoharinome VM, Andriamandimby S-F, Héraud J-M, Coste C, et al. Drivers of Rift Valley fever epidemics in Madagascar. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017;114(5):938–43. pmid:28096420
- 30. Ochieng P, Nyandega I, Wambua B. Spatial-temporal analysis of historical and projected drought events over Isiolo County, Kenya. Theor Appl Climatol. 2022;148(1–2):531–50.
- 31.
KNBS. Kenya population and housing census-Population by county and sub-county. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS); 2019.
- 32. Achiba GA. Managing livelihood risks: Income diversification and the livelihood strategies of households in pastoral settlements in Isiolo County, Kenya. Pastoralism. 2018;8(1):20.
- 33. Singh AL, Jamal S, Baba SA, Islam MM. Environmental and health impacts from slaughter houses located on the city outskirts: a case study. J Environ Prot (Irvine, Calif). 2014;2014.
- 34. Ameso EA, Bukachi SA, Olungah CO, Haller T. Ethnography of the slaughterhouse: A case of Nanyuki slaughterhouse in Laikipia County, Rift Valley, Kenya. Pastoralism. 2017;7(1):1–6.
- 35. Krejcie RV, Morgan DW. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ Psychol Meas. 1970;30(3):607–10.
- 36. Bivand R, Lewin-Koh N, Pebesma E, Archer E, Baddeley A, Bearman N, et al. Package ‘maptools’. https://cranutstatutorontoca/web/packages/maptools/maptoolspdf. 2023.
- 37. Ibrahim M, Schelling E, Zinsstag J, Hattendorf J, Andargie E, Tschopp R. Sero-prevalence of brucellosis, Q-fever and Rift Valley fever in humans and livestock in Somali Region, Ethiopia. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15(1):e0008100. pmid:33493173
- 38. Sindato C, Karimuribo ED, Vairo F, Misinzo G, Rweyemamu MM, Hamid MMA, et al. Rift Valley fever seropositivity in humans and domestic ruminants and associated risk factors in Sengerema, Ilala, and Rufiji districts, Tanzania. Int J Infect Dis. 2022;122:559–65. pmid:35811085
- 39. Muema J, Oboge H, Mutono N, Makori A, Oyugi J, Bukania Z, et al. Sero-epidemiology of brucellosis in people and their livestock: A linked human-animal cross-sectional study in a pastoralist community in Kenya. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:1031639. pmid:36467641
- 40. Munyua P, Osoro E, Hunsperger E, Ngere I, Muturi M, Mwatondo A, et al. High incidence of human brucellosis in a rural Pastoralist community in Kenya, 2015. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15(2):e0009049. pmid:33524052
- 41. Osoro EM, Munyua P, Omulo S, Ogola E, Ade F, Mbatha P, et al. Strong association between human and animal Brucella seropositivity in a linked study in Kenya, 2012–2013. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015;93(2):224. pmid:26101275
- 42. Bronsvoort BMd Bagninbom J-M, Ndip L Kelly RF, Handel I Tanya VN, et al. Comparison of two Rift Valley fever serological tests in Cameroonian cattle populations using a Bayesian latent class approach. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2019;6:258. pmid:31475162
- 43. Fadeel MA, Hoffmaster AR, Shi J, Pimentel G, Stoddard RA. Comparison of four commercial IgM and IgG ELISA kits for diagnosing brucellosis. J Med Microbiol. 2011;60(12):1767–73. pmid:21835974
- 44. Warimwe GM, Gesharisha J, Carr BV, Otieno S, Otingah K, Wright D, et al. Chimpanzee adenovirus vaccine provides multispecies protection against Rift Valley fever. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):1–7.
- 45.
Team RDC. A language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org. 2022.
- 46. Harrell FE Jr, Harrell MFE Jr. Package ‘hmisc’. CRAN2018. 2019;2019:235–6.
- 47. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S, Christensen RHB, Singmann H, et al. Package ‘lme4’. URL http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org. 2009.
- 48. Wolak M, Wolak MM. Package ‘ICC’. Facilitating estimation of the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. 2015.
- 49. Mukhtar F, Kokab F. Brucella serology in abattoir workers. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2008;20(3):57–61. pmid:19610518
- 50. Swai ES, Schoonman L. Human brucellosis: seroprevalence and risk factors related to high risk occupational groups in Tanga Municipality, Tanzania. Zoonoses Public Health. 2009;56(4):183–7. pmid:18811674
- 51. LaBeaud AD, Pfeil S, Muiruri S, Dahir S, Sutherland LJ, Traylor Z, et al. Factors associated with severe human rift valley fever in Sangailu, Garissa county, Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9(3):e0003548. pmid:25764399
- 52.
Corbel MJ. Brucellosis in humans and animals: World Health Organization; 2006.
- 53. Gakuya F, Akoko J, Wambua L, Nyamota R, Ronoh B, Lekolool I, et al. Evidence of co-exposure with Brucella spp, Coxiella burnetii, and Rift Valley fever virus among various species of wildlife in Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022;16(8):e0010596. pmid:35939503
- 54. Nicholas DE, Jacobsen KH, Waters NM. Risk factors associated with human Rift Valley fever infection: systematic review and meta-analysis. Trop Med Int Health. 2014;19(12):1420–9. pmid:25252137
- 55. Cook EAJ, Grossi-Soyster EN, De Glanville WA, Thomas LF, Kariuki S, Bronsvoort BMdC, et al. The sero-epidemiology of Rift Valley fever in people in the Lake Victoria Basin of western Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(7):e0005731. pmid:28686589
- 56. de St. Maurice A, Nyakarahuka L, Purpura L, Ervin E, Tumusiime A, Balinandi S, et al. Rift Valley Fever: A survey of knowledge, attitudes, and practice of slaughterhouse workers and community members in Kabale District, Uganda. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(3):e0006175. pmid:29505579
- 57. Munyua PM, Njenga MK, Osoro EM, Onyango CO, Bitek AO, Mwatondo A, et al. Successes and challenges of the One Health approach in Kenya over the last decade. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1–9.