SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2016 / Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 2

The prevalence of tularemia in occupational groups that have contact with animals

Mehmet DOĞANAY
Özgür ÇELEBİ
Aliye GÜLMEZ SAĞLAM
Salih OTLU
Doğan AKÇA
Selçuk KILIÇ
Elif ÇELİK
Mitat ŞAHİN
Bekir ÇELEBİ
Fatih BÜYÜK
Pages
451–456
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Similar studies are recommended in order to further clarify the epidemiology of the disease in the northeast of Turkey.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: The aim of the current study was to investigate the presence of antibodies against Francisella tularensis in individuals in different occupations that have contact with animals in the Kars region of northeastern Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: A total of 201 blood samples specifically including 103 farmers, 45 clinical veterinarians, 42 butchers, and 11 hunters were analyzed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Similar studies are recommended in order to further clarify the epidemiology of the disease in the northeast of Turkey.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: The aim of the current study was to investigate the presence of antibodies against Francisella tularensis in individuals in different occupations that have contact with animals in the Kars region of northeastern Turkey. Materials and methods: A total of 201 blood samples specifically including 103 farmers, 45 clinical veterinarians, 42 butchers, and 11 hunters were analyzed. The results of the study were reported in relation to some sociodemographic features (age, sex, occupation, and experience) of the volunteers. The presence of antibodies was determined by a microagglutination (MA) test. In addition, positive sera were confirmed using an ELISA kit. Results: Fifteen (7.46%) individuals, including fourteen farmers and one clinical veterinarian, were found to be positive for F. tularensis by both MA and ELISA with a titer range of 1/10 to 1/160. The highest seroprevalence rate was observed in farmers (13.59%), followed by clinical veterinarians (2.22%). The occurrence of tularemia was found to increase with age. Conclusion: Though the main route of tularemia outbreaks is water-borne in Turkey, it was determined that people whose occupations bring them into contact with animals are at risk. Similar studies are recommended in order to further clarify the epidemiology of the disease in the northeast of Turkey.

🔖

Cite This Article

DOĞANAY, M., ÇELEBİ, Ö., SAĞLAM, A. G., OTLU, S., AKÇA, D., KILIÇ, S., ÇELİK, E., ŞAHİN, M., ÇELEBİ, B., BÜYÜK, F. (2022). The prevalence of tularemia in occupational groups that have contact with animals. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 2, 451–456. https://ajindex.com/articles/610691

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Friend M. Tularemia, Circular 1297. Reston, VA, USA: US Geological Survey Publications: 2006
  2. Balci E, Borlu A, Kilic AU, Demiraslan H, Oksuzkaya A, Doganay M. Tularemia outbreaks in Kayseri, Turkey: an evaluation of the effect of climate change and climate variability on tularemia outbreaks. J Infect Public Health 2014; 7: 125–132
  3. Kilic AU, Doganay M. Tularemia: a re-emerging disease. Veterinary Journal of Ankara University 2013; 60: 275–280
  4. Ellis J, Oyston PCF, Green M, Titball RW. Tularemia. Clin Microbiol Rev 2002; 15: 631–646
  5. Sjostedt A. Tularemia: history, epidemiology, pathogen physiology, and clinical manifestations. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007; 1105: 1–29
  6. Dennis DT. Tularemia. In: Armstrong D, Cohen J, editors, Infectious Diseases. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Mosby; 1999. pp. 6.34.19–36.34.23
  7. Kılıç S. A general overview of Francisella tularensis and the epidemiology of tularemia in Turkey. Flora 2010; 15: 37–58
  8. Plevnelioğlu KH. Memleketimizde tularemi. Tedavi Kliniği ve Laboratuvarı Dergisi 1936; 6: 119–135 (article in Turkish)
  9. Golem SB. Lüleburgaz’da yeni bir tularemi epidemisi. Turk Hij Tecr Biyol Derg 1945; 5: 27–40 (article in Turkish)
  10. Kılıçturgay K, Gökırmak F, Gedikoğlu S, Helvacı S, Töre O, Tolunay Ş. Bursa’da tularemi epidemisi. İnfeksiyon Dergisi 1989; 3: 149–156 (article in Turkish)
  11. Sahin M, Atabay HI, Bicakci Z, Unver A, Otlu S. Outbreaks of tularemia in Turkey. Kobe J Med Sci 2007; 53: 37–42
  12. Gönen İ. A small outbreak of tularemia in a rural area. Turk J Med Sci 2013: 43: 75–78
  13. Yeşilyurt M, Kılıç S, Çağasar O, Celebi B, Gül S. Two cases of tick-borne tularemia in Yozgat province, Turkey. Mikrobiyol Bul 2011; 45: 746–754
  14. Aydın F, Atabay HI, Genç O, Atahan H, Bölük M. The epizootilogy and epidemiology of Anthax in Kars District, assessment of Anthrax cases recorded between 1995 and 2000, some characteristics of B. anthracis strains isolated from various sources. Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kafkas University 2000; 6: 55–59
  15. Şahin M, Bıçakcı Z. Üç çocukta leptospiroz vakası. Cocuk Derg 2005; 5: 139–142 (article in Turkish)
  16. Otlu S, Sahin M, Atabay HI, Unver A. Serological investigations of brucellosis in cattle, farmers and veterinarians in the Kars district of Turkey. Acat Vet Brno 2008; 77: 117–121
  17. Buyuk F, Celebi O, Linley E, Cooper C, Doganay M, Sahin M, Baillie L. Does environmental exposure to spores of Bacillus anthracis lead to sub-clinical infection. In