A Multidisciplinary "One Health" Tool for Tackling Brucellosis

• Published in: Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) Vol. 24; no. 6; p. 351
• Main Authors: Dougas, Georgios, Vorou, Regina, Katsiolis, Aristomenis, Kalotychou, Danai, Katerelos, Panagiotis, Tsiodras, Sotirios, Mellou, Kassiani
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.06.2024
• Subjects: Animals; Brucellosis - epidemiology; Brucellosis - veterinary; Cattle; Goat Diseases - epidemiology; Goat Diseases - microbiology; Goats; Humans; One Health; Sheep; Sheep Diseases - epidemiology; Sheep Diseases - microbiology; Zoonoses; Contact Tracing; brucellosis; One Health
• ISSN: 1557-7759
• DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2023.0086

The Epizootiological Investigation Form (EIF) is a document issued for every notified human brucellosis case, with the aim to convey information from public health to veterinary authorities for farm animals epidemiologically linked with the patient. We assessed the integration of EIF to the routine collaboration among stakeholders and the efficiency in directing the veterinary efforts to identify -infected animals. EIFs were evaluated for the implementation, timeliness, and completeness of the shared information provided by the public health and the veterinary authorities. The efficiency of EIFs in identifying infected farms was compared with the infection rate of routinely screened farms in the frame of the national brucellosis program. During 2017-2022, 344 EIFs were issued for equal number of human brucellosis cases and 118 (34.3%) were circulated successfully among all stakeholders, whereas 226 (65.7%) went missing. The highest rate of intersectoral circulation occurred in May (47.8%,  = 0.007). Veterinary investigation was performed, and result was provided in 62 (57.4%) of the 108 circulated EIFs that disclosed the contact details of the epidemiologically linked animal farms. was detected at a significantly higher rate (51.7%) in the investigated sheep and goats' farms than the infection rate (2.7%) of the national brucellosis program (  < 0.00001). Among the screened bovine herds, two were found infected of the eight tested (25%). The circulation among all competent authorities of EIFs with a farm screening outcome required a median (interquartile range) of 50 days (22, 88). The likelihood of a "complete" EIF per human case differed among geographic Regions (  = 0.010), and was higher for patients diagnosed in April (  = 0.001) and occupied as stockbreeders (  = 0.025). EIF is a useful tool for pinpointing suspected animals for brucellosis screening. Training of the collaborating personnel is essential for improving the implementation of EIF in the everyday practice.