Search

Over the past decade, Lyme and other tick-borne diseases have expanded into urban areas, including Staten Island, New York. While Lyme disease is often researched with a focus on human risk, domestic pets are also at risk of contracting the disease. The present study aims to describe differences in tick exposure, knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) between pet owners and non-owners, and to understand preventive strategies practiced by pet owners for themselves and their pets. We conducted KAP surveys via phone in 2020 and via face-to-face interviews in 2021, and we analyzed unique responses from 364 households on Staten Island. Pet owners were more likely to have ever found a tick on themselves or their household members (63%) than non-owners (46%) (p<0.001). Among pet owners, those who owned dogs (dog-only or both dog and cat owners) were more likely to have ever found a tick on their pets than cat-only owners (p<0.001). Compared with non-pet owners, pet owners were more likely both to know that ticks transmit Lyme disease (p<0.001) and to avoid gardening to reduce their tick exposure (p = 0.032), but they were less likely to wear protective clothing or adjust clothing (p = 0.013). Compared with cat owners who had never found a tick on their cats, cat owners who had ever found a tick on their cats were more likely to let their cats go outside (p<0.001). However, reported preventive measures on cats did not differ between pet owners who did and did not report tick exposure. The results indicate that encouraging pet owners to engage in preventative measures, both to protect themselves and their pets, is a potential avenue for healthcare providers and veterinarians to reduce risks from ticks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tick-borne pathogens are understudied among domestic animals in sub-Saharan Africa but represent significant threats to the health of domestic animals and humans. Specifically, additional data are needed on tick-borne pathogens in Chad, Africa. Surveillance was conducted among domestic dogs in Chad for selected tick-borne pathogens to measure (1) the prevalence of antibodies against Anaplasma spp., Borrelia burgdorferi, and Ehrlichia spp.; (2) the prevalence of infections caused by Hepatozoon spp., Ehrlichia canis, Anaplasma platys, and Babesia spp.; and (3) associations of pathogens with demographic, spatial, and temporal factors. Blood samples were collected from domestic dogs at three time points (May 2019, November 2019, June 2020) across 23 villages in southern Chad. Results: Of the 428 dogs tested with the IDEXX SNAP 4Dx test in May 2019, 86% (n = 370, 95% CI = 83–90%) were positive for antibodies to Ehrlichia spp., 21% (n = 88, 95% CI = 17–25%) were positive for antibodies to Anaplasma spp., and 0.7% (n = 3, 95% CI = 0.1–2%) were positive for antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi. Four different pathogens were detected via PCR. Hepatozoon spp. were most commonly detected (67.2–93.4%, depending on the time point of sampling), followed by E. canis (7.0-27.8%), A. platys (10.1–22.0%), and Babesia vogeli (0.4–1.9%). Dogs were coinfected with up to three pathogens at a single time point, and coinfections were most common in May 2019 compared to November 2019 and May 2020. Conclusions: Overall, this study provides new data about the epidemiology of tick-borne pathogens in domestic dogs in Chad, with potential implications for dog and human health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One Health (OH) is defined as a unifying approach aiming to sustainably balance and optimise the health of people, animals and the ecosystem. It recognises that the health of humans, animals (both domestic and wild), plants and the wider ecosystem are both interdependent and linked. As a concept, it aims to address complex problems requiring input from multiple disciplines. Suitable issues for OH approaches typically include global issues which can widely impact not only the health of humans and animals, but also have a significant environmental impact. Examples include emerging zoonotic diseases and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Interpretations and use of the term OH differ in the literature and have the potential to dilute its impact. The meaning of OH among the research community has evolved over time. Here, we collate the OH relevant literature from the last two decades, identifying major themes and trends and considering how OH has been embraced differently across various geographical regions. Methods and results: Bibliographic databases were searched using the term "One Health" AND ("Veterinary" OR "Animal") AND ("Medicine" OR "Human") AND ("Environment" OR "Ecosystem") during the period between 1980 and 2022. Data analysis and narrative synthesis identified themes, similarities, and differences within literature. Web of Science and PubMed returned 948 and 1250 results for the period mentioned above. The predominant literature focused on human health, with veterinary health second, although often to benefit human health. It was found that OH is often utilised as a public health approach, generally towards the end of disease surveillance and control. Interestingly, while authors from low- and middle-income countries were well-represented within studies using the term OH, they were less well-represented as corresponding authors. Conclusions: The predominant focus of the literature was on human and veterinary health, implying OH approach is human-orientated, despite its suggestion that all domains share a common 'health'. Potential improvement to OH could be achieved through greater incorporation of the environmental and social sciences for a more encompassing approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animal behaviour and welfare research are part of a wider endeavour to optimize the health and wellbeing of humans, animals and ecosystems. As such, it is part of the One Health research agenda. This article applies ethical principles described by the One Health High Level Expert Panel to animal behaviour and welfare research. These principles entail that animal behaviour and welfare research should be valued equitably alongside other research in transdisciplinary and multisectoral collaboration. It should include and promote a multiplicity of marginalized voices, including those of animals, and it should apply and describe a harmonious balance between human—animal-environment interactions. Lastly, it should describe how humans need to change behaviour, adopt sustainable solutions and recognize the importance of animal welfare and the integrity of the whole ecosystem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rabies, caused by the rhabdovirus, is a fatal zoonotic disease with over 59,000 annual deaths globally. Asia and Africa account for 95%, with India leading, followed by China. In Pakistan, where it's endemic, over 50,000 cases are reported yearly. Controlling rabid dog populations through vaccination is crucial in curbing mortality. This research aimed to evaluate healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning rabies in Peshawar, Pakistan. Methods: The study was conducted at different tertiary care hospitals in Peshawar, Pakistan from 16 August 2021 to 15 February 2022. Cross-sectional research was conducted to gather data from a total of 100 healthcare workers representing different sections within the healthcare field, including Medical Officers, House Officers, Faculty Staff, Nurses, and Paramedics. Data on knowledge, attitudes, and practices about rabies were collected using a standardized questionnaire. The data analysis included using descriptive statistics and chi-square testing to ascertain potential correlations. Results: Among the healthcare professionals, 68 (68%) were males, and 32 (32%) were females. Profession-wise, the included professionals were Nurses 31 (31%), Medical Officers 27 (27%), House officers 26 (26%), paramedical staff 13 (13%), and faculty staff 3 (3%). 91 (91%) and 9 (9%) healthcare professionals responded that dogs and cats are responsible for rabies transmission, respectively. Moreover, 82 (82%) individuals responded that animal bite plays a vital role in the transmission of rabies, whilst 76 (76%) individuals responded that rabies transferred from human to human. 82 (82%) individuals replied that the anti-rabies vaccine (ARV) is the treatment of choice for rabies. Furthermore, 78 (78%) individuals responded that ARV is safe in pregnancy and lactation. Moreover, after being asked about the perception of the health care professionals about the failure in controlling rabies, their responses were unavailability of ARV/RIG 41 (41%), lack of control of stray dogs 34 (34%), lack of awareness 20 (20%). The study revealed statistically significant correlations between healthcare occupations and variables: knowledge of animals responsible for transmitting rabies (p = 0.024) and awareness of human-to-human transmission (p = 0.007). Significant disparities were noted in understanding rabies transmission through contaminated water (p = 0.002). There were variations in attitudes and practices seen across different positions, particularly about views about home treatments (p = 0.033) and the perceived effectiveness of cleansing bite wounds (p = 0.010). Disparities in perceptions of rabies treatment and the accessibility of anti-rabies vaccines and immunoglobulin were observed, with variations based on individual roles. Conclusion: The present research elucidates variations in rabies knowledge, attitudes, and practices among healthcare workers, specifically concerning their respective roles. Tailored training programs and standardized practices play a crucial role in mitigating these discrepancies, fostering a greater understanding of rabies, and enhancing the quality of patient treatment. It is recommended that future studies undertake an assessment of the efficacy of therapies and advocate for the adoption of collaborative One Health strategies in the realm of rabies management. Author summary: This study examines healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding rabies in Peshawar, Pakistan. There are disparities among professions in terms of awareness levels regarding transmission, treatment, and prevention. Nurses and medical officers display a higher level of awareness, while house officers and paramedics demonstrate a deficit in certain aspects. It is recommended to implement tailored training programs to address these gaps and improve the quality of patient care. The study emphasizes the importance of access to post-exposure prophylaxis and public awareness. Future research should focus on intervention effectiveness and collaborative One Health strategies. Despite limitations, this study contributes significantly to rabies control efforts, potentially saving lives and improving public health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rabies virus (RABV; species Lyssavirus rabies) is causing one of the oldest zoonotic diseases known to mankind, leading to fatal encephalomyelitis in animals and humans. Despite the existence of safe and effective vaccines to prevent the disease, an estimated 99% of human rabies deaths worldwide are caused by dog-mediated rabies with children at the highest risk of infection. Rabies has been endemic in Madagascar for over a century, yet there has been little research evaluating local knowledge and practices impacting on the rabies control and prevention. Thus, this study was undertaken to better understand the dog ecology including canine vaccine coverage and to assess knowledge and practices of dog owners and veterinarians. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 123 dog-owning households in thirteen fokontanys in Mahajanga from July 4 to September 13, 2016. Single and multi-member dog-owning households in the study area on the day of the interview were eligible for inclusion and purposively selected with the support of a local guide. The survey included a household questionnaire capturing information on the dog's demographics, husbandry practices, knowledge and practices towards rabies and its control measures; the dog ecology questionnaire collected dog characteristics, vaccination status and husbandry practices. All households that reported a dog bite incident, were invited to participate in a dog bite questionnaire. In addition, direct observations of roaming dogs were conducted to assess dog population demographics and to document behavioural characteristics. Two veterinarians were purposively selected and took part in an interview during the survey period, providing information on rabies control activities, including dog-care practices in the area. Descriptive and inferential data analyses were performed using Epi Info version 7.1.5.0 (CDC Atlanta, USA). Results: We recorded a total of 400 dogs, of which 338 (84.5%) were owned amongst 123 households. More than half (67.8%) of owned dogs were between 1 to 5 years old and 95.6% were kept for guarding purposes. 45% of the surveyed dogs had free access to roam outside the premises. The majority (85.4%) of dog owners were knowledgeable that a dog bite could potentially transmit RABV to humans. 19 dog bites were reported and of these 73.6% were caused by the owner's or a neighbour's dog. In 6 of the 19 cases, children between 7 and 15 years of age were the victims. Dog vaccination coverage against rabies was 34% among owned dogs. Of the participants aware of a veterinarian, the majority (55/82) indicated that they accessed veterinarian services at irregular intervals. The main obstacles to vaccinations cited by dog owners were limited financial resources and difficulty accessing veterinary care. Conclusion: This study contributes to enhanced understanding of the dog ecology including canine vaccine coverage as well as knowledge and practices of dog owners in Madagascar. Most dogs in the study area were accessible for preventive vaccination through their owners, however only one third of the investigated canine population was vaccinated against rabies. Concerted national efforts towards rabies prevention and control should aim to address financial challenges and access to veterinary services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article interrogates anthropocentrism and nonhuman animal instrumentalization in One Health (OH). It argues that OH’s approach to human health and zoonosis focuses too narrowly on furthering certain human interests at the expense of nonhuman animals, which is not sustainable, just, or compassionate. This article also offers an alternative vision for protecting and promoting health for all over the long term that includes the human right to self-determination and the nonhuman animal right to not be exploited or abused. This rights-based approach recognizes that the root causes of zoonosis should be identified and addressed via policies and actions that challenge nonhuman animal exploitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]