Risk factors associated with Leishmania exposure among dogs in a rural area of Ilha Solteira, SP, Brazil

• Published in: Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
• Main Authors: Julio Cesar Pereira Spada, Diogo Tiago da Silva, Maria Luana Alves, Nicolás Céspedes Cárdenas, Osvaldo Frederico Inlamea, Glaucia Amorim Faria, Andrea Gonçalves Ferreira, Helio Ricardo Silva, Trícia Maria Ferreira de Sousa Oliveira, Wilma Aparecida Starke Buzetti
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical (SBMT) 2020
• Subjects: Risk factors; Leishmania; Dogs; Rural area; Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Arctic
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0059-2020; https://doaj.org/article/fb1c3d00f97d4745bbd34a218c8be2fc

Abstract INTRODUCTION: We sought to determine risk factors (RFs) associated with the presence of antibodies against Leishmania in dogs from a rural area of Ilha Solteira, SP, Brazil. METHODS: Serum samples were collected from 250 dogs and tested using indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and indirect immunofluorescence antibody tests (IFATs). Data concerning dogs, their environment, and their owners’ knowledge of leishmaniasis were collected using a questionnaire. To determine RFs for contact with the parasite, univariate statistical analysis based on chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests, followed by logistic regression, was used. RESULTS: It was found that 79/250 (31.6%) of the dogs were positive by IFAT, and 72/250 (28.8%) by ELISA. A total of 82/250 dogs (32.8%) were positive in at least one test. The RFs associated with occurrences of Leishmania exposure were large body size (OR = 2.25; 95% CI = 1.26-4.04; p = 0.003), presence of chickens (OR = 1.94; 95% CI = 1.05-3.65; p = 0.023), and lack of knowledge about Leishmania among dog owners (OR = 1.74; 95% CI = 0.96-3.21; p = 0.049). After multivariate analysis, the RFs for occurrence of Leishmania exposure in dogs that remained significantly associated were the dog’s size (large dogs) (OR = 1.2; 95% CI = 1.06-1.35; p = 0.003) and presence of chickens on the properties (small farms) (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.02-1.30; p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: These results may be useful for improving preventive practices to reduce the incidence of Leishmania exposure among dogs in rural areas.