Search

Abstract Background The primary objective of this cross-sectional study, conducted in Québec and Bristish Columbia (Canada) between February 2021 and January 2022, was to measure the prevalence of viral RNA in oronasal and rectal swabs and serum antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) amongst cats living in households with at least one confirmed human case. Secondary objectives included a description of potential risk factors for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and an estimation of the association between the presence of viral RNA in swabs as well as SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and clinical signs. Oronasal and rectal swabs and sera were collected from 55 cats from 40 households at most 15 days after a human case confirmation, and at up to two follow-up visits. A RT-qPCR assay and an ELISA were used to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in swabs and serum SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, respectively. Prevalence and 95% Bayesian credibility intervals (BCI) were calculated, and associations were evaluated using prevalence ratio and 95% BCI obtained from Bayesian mixed log-binomial models. Results Nine (0.16; 95% BCI = 0.08–0.28) and 38 (0.69; 95% BCI = 0.56–0.80) cats had at least one positive RT-qPCR and at least one positive serological test result, respectively. No risk factor was associated with the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies. The prevalence of clinical signs suggestive of COVID-19 in cats, mainly sneezing, was 2.12 (95% BCI = 1.03–3.98) times higher amongst cats with detectable viral RNA compared to those without. Conclusions We showed that cats develop antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 when exposed to recent human cases, but detection of viral RNA on swabs is rare, even when sampling occurs soon after confirmation of a human case. Moreover, cats with detectable levels of virus showed clinical signs more often than cats without signs, which can be useful for the management of such cases.

Abstract Background With increased attention to the importance of integrating the One Health approach into zoonotic disease surveillance and response, a greater understanding of the mechanisms to support effective communication and information sharing across animal and human health sectors is needed. The objectives of this qualitative case study were to describe the communication channels used between human and animal health stakeholders and to identify the elements that have enabled the integration of the One Health approach. Methods We combined documentary research with interviews with fifteen stakeholders to map the communication channels used in human and swine influenza surveillance in Alberta, Canada, as well as in the response to a human case of H1N2v in 2020. A thematic analysis of the interviews was also used to identify the barriers and facilitators to communication among stakeholders from the animal and human health sectors. Results When a human case of swine influenza emerged, the response led by the provincial Chief Medical Officer of Health involved players at various levels of government and in the human and animal health sectors. The collaboration of public and animal health laboratories and of the swine sector, in addition to the information available through the surveillance systems in place, was swift and effective. Elements identified as enabling smooth communication between the human and animal health systems included preexisting relationships between the various stakeholders, a relationship of trust between them (e.g., the swine sector and their perception of government structures), the presence of stakeholders acting as permanent liaisons between the ministries of health and agriculture, and stakeholders' understanding of the importance of the One Health approach. Conclusions Information flows through formal and informal channels and both structural and relational features that can support rapid and effective communication in infectious disease surveillance and outbreak response.

BackgroundThe effectiveness of public health measures (PHMs) depends on population adherence. Social media were suggested as a tool to assess adherence, but representativeness and accuracy issues have been raised. ObjectiveThe objectives of this repeated cross-sectional study were to compare self-reported PHM adherence and sociodemographic characteristics between people who used Twitter (subsequently rebranded X) and people who did not use Twitter. MethodsRepeated Canada-wide web-based surveys were conducted every 14 days from September 2020 to March 2022. Weighted proportions were calculated for descriptive variables. Using Bayesian logistic regression models, we investigated associations between Twitter use, as well as opinions in tweets, and self-reported adherence with mask wearing and vaccination. ResultsData from 40,230 respondents were analyzed. As self-reported, Twitter was used by 20.6% (95% CI 20.1%-21.2%) of Canadians, of whom 29.9% (95% CI 28.6%-31.3%) tweeted about COVID-19. The sociodemographic characteristics differed across categories of Twitter use and opinions. Overall, 11% (95% CI 10.6%-11.3%) of Canadians reported poor adherence to mask-wearing, and 10.8% (95% CI 10.4%-11.2%) to vaccination. Twitter users who tweeted about COVID-19 reported poorer adherence to mask wearing than nonusers, which was modified by the age of the respondents and their geographical region (odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% Bayesian credibility interval [BCI] 0.18-1.69 to OR 4.83, 95% BCI 3.13-6.86). The odds of poor adherence to vaccination of Twitter users who tweeted about COVID-19 were greater than those of nonusers (OR 1.76, 95% BCI 1.48-2.07). English- and French-speaking Twitter users who tweeted critically of PHMs were more likely (OR 4.07, 95% BCI 3.38-4.80 and OR 7.31, 95% BCI 4.26-11.03, respectively) to report poor adherence to mask wearing than non–Twitter users, and those who tweeted in support were less likely (OR 0.47, 95% BCI 0.31-0.64 and OR 0.96, 95% BCI 0.18-2.33, respectively) to report poor adherence to mask wearing than non–Twitter users. The OR of poor adherence to vaccination for those tweeting critically about PHMs and for those tweeting in support of PHMs were 4.10 (95% BCI 3.40-4.85) and 0.20 (95% BCI 0.10-0.32), respectively, compared to non–Twitter users. ConclusionsOpinions shared on Twitter can be useful to public health authorities, as they are associated with adherence to PHMs. However, the sociodemographics of social media users do not represent the general population, calling for caution when using tweets to assess general population-level behaviors.

While One Health initiatives are gaining in popularity, it is unclear if and how they are evaluated when implementation at scale is intended. The main purpose of this scoping review was to describe how One Health initiatives targeting infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance at a large scale are evaluated. Secondary objectives included identifying the main facilitators and barriers to the implementation and success of these initiatives, and how their impacts were assessed. Twenty-three studies evaluating One Health initiatives were eligible. Most studies included the human (n = 22) and animal (n = 15) sectors; only four included the environment sector. The types of evaluated initiative (non-exclusive) included governance (n = 5), knowledge (n = 6), protection (n = 17), promotion (n = 16), prevention (n = 9), care (n = 8), advocacy (n = 10) and capacity (n = 10). Studies used normative (n = 4) and evaluative (n = 20) approaches to assess the One Health initiatives, the latter including impact (n = 19), implementation (n = 8), and performance (n = 7) analyses. Structural and economic, social, political, communication and coordination-related factors, as well as ontological factors, were identified as both facilitators and barriers for successful One Health initiatives. These results identified a wide range of evaluation methods and indicators used to demonstrate One Health's added values, strengths, and limitations: the inherent complexity of the One Health approach leads to the use of multiple types of evaluation. The strengths and remaining gaps in the evaluation of such initiative highlight the relevance of comprehensive, mixed-method, context-sensitive evaluation frameworks to inform and support the implementation of One Health initiatives by stakeholders in different governance settings.

Metritis affects up to 40% of dairy cows and it is usually treated with antibiotics. In spite of their advantages, there is an increased concern about antibiotic resistance leading to the research of alternative methods. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a combination of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) on the prevalence of metritis and modulation of endometrial and neutrophil inflammatory markers in dairy cows. One hundred and thirty-five cows were enrolled 3 week before calving and randomly assigned to three treatments. Treatment groups were: (1) two intravaginal doses of LAB/wk during 3 week pre-calving (vaginal, n = 45); (2) an intra-uterine dose, once 1 d after calving (uterine, n = 44); and (3) no intervention (CTRL, n = 45). Metritis was defined as body temperature > 39.5°C and purulent vaginal discharge (> 50% pus), and diagnosed 6 d after calving. Blood samples were taken at d −14, −10, −7, −4, +1, +3, +6, and +14 relative to calving for non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) analysis. At d −10, +1, +3, and +6 neutrophils were isolated from blood for gene expression analysis by RT-qPCR. Endometrium biopsies were taken from 30 cows, 15 from CTRL and 15 from the uterine group at d +1, +3, and +6 after calving for pro-inflammatory markers analysis by NanoString®. Vaginal treatment reduced metritis prevalence (6/45) up to 58% compared with CTRL group (14/45), but there was no difference between the uterine and CTRL group. Uterine and vaginal treatments reduced blood neutrophil gene expression. Expression of pro-inflammatory markers in the endometrium did not differ between uterine and CTRL cows. Metritic cows expressed more C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 8 (CXCL8) and interleukin 1 beta (IL1B) at d 3 than healthy cows, whereas healthy cows expressed more CXCL8 at d 1 relative to calving in the endometrium. This study shows a promising potential of LAB probiotics as a preventive treatment against metritis in dairy cows.

The ability of automated activity monitoring (AAM) systems to detect estrus is influenced by multiple variables. The luteal phase (LP) preceding estrus has been shown to be important for hormones release, and behavior during estrus in ruminants, but its impact on activity as measured by AAM systems has not been studied. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of the length of the preceding LP on the intensity and duration of estrus as measured by AAM, and on the expression of estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) in the endometrium. A total of 60 cows between 46 and 53 days in milk were assigned to either a normal or a short length LP. Length of the LP was insured by the use of hormonal synchronization programs. Cows in both treatments were matched on parity, milk production, body condition score (BCS), and lameness score (assessed at enrolment). Expression of ERα receptors in the endometrium were evaluated by nuclear staining by immunohistochemistry of biopsies. Estrus was defined as the day on which the AAM system detected estrus. Cows that were not synchronized by the protocol or that were not detected in estrus by the AAM systems were excluded, which left 21 and 11 cows for analyses in the normal and short length LP, respectively. Peak activity index of estrus, duration of estrus, and expression of ERα were outcomes for multivariable linear regression models. Cows with short length LP tended to have lower peak activity at estrus, but there was no significant effect of treatment when BCS was accounted for. Cows with BCS ≤ 2.5 had less intense and shorter estrus than cows with BCS ≥ 2.75. There was no association between the length of the LP and the expression of ERα in the endometrium.