Cargando…

Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016

Prospective, population-based surveillance to systematically ascertain exposures to food production animals or their environments among Minnesota residents with sporadic, domestically acquired, laboratory-confirmed enteric zoonotic pathogen infections was conducted from 2012 through 2016. Twenty-thr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klumb, CA, Scheftel, JM, Smith, KE
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32172700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268819002309
_version_ 1783507649410629632
author Klumb, CA
Scheftel, JM
Smith, KE
author_facet Klumb, CA
Scheftel, JM
Smith, KE
author_sort Klumb, CA
collection PubMed
description Prospective, population-based surveillance to systematically ascertain exposures to food production animals or their environments among Minnesota residents with sporadic, domestically acquired, laboratory-confirmed enteric zoonotic pathogen infections was conducted from 2012 through 2016. Twenty-three percent (n = 1708) of the 7560 enteric disease cases in the study reported an animal agriculture exposure in their incubation period, including 60% (344/571) of Cryptosporidium parvum cases, 28% (934/3391) of Campylobacter cases, 22% (85/383) of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) O157 cases, 16% (83/521) of non-O157 STEC cases, 10% (253/2575) of non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica cases and 8% (9/119) of Yersinia enterocolitica cases. Living and/or working on a farm accounted for 61% of cases with an agricultural exposure, followed by visiting a private farm (29% of cases) and visiting a public animal agriculture venue (10% of cases). Cattle were the most common animal type in agricultural exposures, reported by 72% of cases. The estimated cumulative incidence of zoonotic enteric infections for people who live and/or work on farms with food production animals in Minnesota during 2012–2016 was 147 per 10 000 population, vs. 18.5 per 10 000 for other Minnesotans. The burden of enteric zoonoses among people with animal agriculture exposures appears to be far greater than previously appreciated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7078579
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70785792020-03-23 Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016 Klumb, CA Scheftel, JM Smith, KE Epidemiol Infect Original Paper Prospective, population-based surveillance to systematically ascertain exposures to food production animals or their environments among Minnesota residents with sporadic, domestically acquired, laboratory-confirmed enteric zoonotic pathogen infections was conducted from 2012 through 2016. Twenty-three percent (n = 1708) of the 7560 enteric disease cases in the study reported an animal agriculture exposure in their incubation period, including 60% (344/571) of Cryptosporidium parvum cases, 28% (934/3391) of Campylobacter cases, 22% (85/383) of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) O157 cases, 16% (83/521) of non-O157 STEC cases, 10% (253/2575) of non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica cases and 8% (9/119) of Yersinia enterocolitica cases. Living and/or working on a farm accounted for 61% of cases with an agricultural exposure, followed by visiting a private farm (29% of cases) and visiting a public animal agriculture venue (10% of cases). Cattle were the most common animal type in agricultural exposures, reported by 72% of cases. The estimated cumulative incidence of zoonotic enteric infections for people who live and/or work on farms with food production animals in Minnesota during 2012–2016 was 147 per 10 000 population, vs. 18.5 per 10 000 for other Minnesotans. The burden of enteric zoonoses among people with animal agriculture exposures appears to be far greater than previously appreciated. Cambridge University Press 2020-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7078579/ /pubmed/32172700 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268819002309 Text en © The Author(s) and Minnesota Department of Health 2020 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Klumb, CA
Scheftel, JM
Smith, KE
Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title_full Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title_fullStr Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title_full_unstemmed Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title_short Animal agriculture exposures among Minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
title_sort animal agriculture exposures among minnesota residents with zoonotic enteric infections, 2012–2016
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32172700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268819002309
work_keys_str_mv AT klumbca animalagricultureexposuresamongminnesotaresidentswithzoonoticentericinfections20122016
AT schefteljm animalagricultureexposuresamongminnesotaresidentswithzoonoticentericinfections20122016
AT smithke animalagricultureexposuresamongminnesotaresidentswithzoonoticentericinfections20122016