Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T15:31:29.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variations in the prevalence of antibody to brucella infection in cattle by farm, area and district in Kenya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 1997

M. KADOHIRA ,
J. J. McDERMOTT ,
M. M. SHOUKRI  and
M. N. KYULE
M. KADOHIRA
Affiliation:
Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada
J. J. McDERMOTT
Affiliation:
Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada Department of Public Health, Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053, Nairobi, Kenya
M. M. SHOUKRI
Affiliation:
Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada
M. N. KYULE
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053, Nairobi, Kenya
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Variations in the sero-prevalence of antibody to brucella infection by cow, farm and area factors were investigated for three contrasting districts in Kenya: Samburu, an arid and pastoral area; Kiambu, a tropical highland area; and Kilifi, a typical tropical coastal area. Cattle were selected by a two-stage cluster sampling procedure and visited once between August 1991 and 1992.

Schall's algorithm, a statistical model suitable for multi-level analysis was used. Using this model, older age, free grazing and large herd size ([ges ] 31) were associated with higher seroprevalence. Also, significant farm-to-farm, area-to-area and district-to-district variations were estimated. The patterns of high risk districts and areas seen were consistent with known animal husbandry and movement risk factors, but the larger than expected farm-to-farm variation within high risk areas and districts could not be explained. Thus, a multi-level method provided additional information beyond conventional analyses of sero-prevalence data.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 118 , Issue 1 , February 1997 , pp. 35 - 41
Copyright
© 1997 Cambridge University Press