Cargando…

Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lyme disease (LD) can have significant consequences for the health of workers. The frequency of infection can be estimated by using prevalence and incidence data on antibodies against Borrelia Burgdoferi (BB). A systematic search of studies published in English between 2002 and 2021 and a meta-analy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Magnavita, Nicola, Capitanelli, Ilaria, Ilesanmi, Olayinka, Chirico, Francesco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870942/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35204387
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020296
_version_ 1784656877693435904
author Magnavita, Nicola
Capitanelli, Ilaria
Ilesanmi, Olayinka
Chirico, Francesco
author_facet Magnavita, Nicola
Capitanelli, Ilaria
Ilesanmi, Olayinka
Chirico, Francesco
author_sort Magnavita, Nicola
collection PubMed
description Lyme disease (LD) can have significant consequences for the health of workers. The frequency of infection can be estimated by using prevalence and incidence data on antibodies against Borrelia Burgdoferi (BB). A systematic search of studies published in English between 2002 and 2021 and a meta-analysis were conducted in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Out of a total of 1125 studies retrieved, 35 articles were included in the systematic review. Overall, in these studies, outdoor workers showed a 20.5% BB seroprevalence rate. Meta-analysis, performed on 15 studies (3932 subjects), revealed a significantly increased risk in outdoor activities (OR 1.93 95%CI 1.15–3.23), with medium-level heterogeneity (I(2) = 69.2%), and non-significant publication bias. The estimated OR in forestry and agricultural workers was 2.36 (CI95% 1.28; 4.34) in comparison with the controls, while a non-significant increase in risk (OR = 1.05, CI95% 0.28; 3.88) was found in the remaining categories of workers (veterinarians, animal breeders, soldiers). The estimated pooled risk was significantly higher in the studies published until 2010 (OR 3.03 95%CI 1.39–6.61), while in more recent studies the odds became non-significant (OR 1.08 95% CI 0.63–1.85). The promotion of awareness campaigns targeting outdoor workers in endemic areas, and the implementation of local programs aimed at controlling range expansion of vectors, are key strategies for protecting workers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8870942
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88709422022-02-25 Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Magnavita, Nicola Capitanelli, Ilaria Ilesanmi, Olayinka Chirico, Francesco Diagnostics (Basel) Systematic Review Lyme disease (LD) can have significant consequences for the health of workers. The frequency of infection can be estimated by using prevalence and incidence data on antibodies against Borrelia Burgdoferi (BB). A systematic search of studies published in English between 2002 and 2021 and a meta-analysis were conducted in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Out of a total of 1125 studies retrieved, 35 articles were included in the systematic review. Overall, in these studies, outdoor workers showed a 20.5% BB seroprevalence rate. Meta-analysis, performed on 15 studies (3932 subjects), revealed a significantly increased risk in outdoor activities (OR 1.93 95%CI 1.15–3.23), with medium-level heterogeneity (I(2) = 69.2%), and non-significant publication bias. The estimated OR in forestry and agricultural workers was 2.36 (CI95% 1.28; 4.34) in comparison with the controls, while a non-significant increase in risk (OR = 1.05, CI95% 0.28; 3.88) was found in the remaining categories of workers (veterinarians, animal breeders, soldiers). The estimated pooled risk was significantly higher in the studies published until 2010 (OR 3.03 95%CI 1.39–6.61), while in more recent studies the odds became non-significant (OR 1.08 95% CI 0.63–1.85). The promotion of awareness campaigns targeting outdoor workers in endemic areas, and the implementation of local programs aimed at controlling range expansion of vectors, are key strategies for protecting workers. MDPI 2022-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8870942/ /pubmed/35204387 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020296 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Magnavita, Nicola
Capitanelli, Ilaria
Ilesanmi, Olayinka
Chirico, Francesco
Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort occupational lyme disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870942/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35204387
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020296
work_keys_str_mv AT magnavitanicola occupationallymediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT capitanelliilaria occupationallymediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ilesanmiolayinka occupationallymediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chiricofrancesco occupationallymediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis