Affiliation:
1. Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
2. Centro de Investigación para la Salud en América Latina, (CISeAL), Escuela de Ciencias Biológicas, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador
3. Facultad de Salud Pública, Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo, Riobamba, Chimborazo, Ecuador
Abstract
Background
Livestock play important economic and cultural roles in smallholder communities of Ecuador, yet they also serve as potential sources of zoonotic infections. Understanding the animal and human health concerns of smallholder farmers is important in guiding strategies for improvement of the health and livelihoods of these resource-poor farmers. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to: (a) assess the health concerns of smallholder farmers; (b) explore animal and waste management practices; and (c) identify predictors of pediatric and livestock diarrhea on smallholder farms in Ecuador.
Methods
This is a cross-sectional survey of 58 smallholder farmers in three communities of Chimborazo province, Ecuador. Data were collected on household demographics, smallholding characteristics, type of animals owned, human-animal interactions, health concerns, and 30-day occurrence of human as well as animal diarrhea. Summary statistics were computed and logistic models used to investigate predictors of pediatric and animal diarrhea.
Results
All respondents reported keeping animals. Animals kept included cattle, pigs, poultry, dogs, guinea pigs, cats, sheep, horses, rabbits, donkeys, or other livestock. More than half of the respondents named diseases as their greatest personal (55.2%) or family (58.6%) health concern, while an even greater percentage (60.3%) reported physiological stress as the primary health concern for their animals. Occurrence of diarrhea in the 30 days prior to the study was reported by 12.1% of the respondents. Additionally, 15.2% and 55.2% of the households reported diarrhea among children and animals, respectively. The majority (65.5%) of the households had toilets, while the remainder had either latrines (27.6%) or no sanitation facilities (6.9%). However, only 9.1% of the smallholdings had either a toilet (3.6%) or a latrine (5.5%) onsite and yet the farmers tended to spend most of the day at the smallholdings. Potential exposures to gastrointestinal pathogens included food- or water-borne sources (93.5% of children; 91.4% of adults) and blood-borne or fecal sources (80.4% of children; 100% of adults). Although 98.3% of the respondents kept cattle, only 27.6% had animal enclosures and even fewer (15.5%) had animal waste management plans. The odds of animal diarrhea were significantly higher (Odds Ratio [OR] = 8.7; 95% Confidence Interval [1.0–75.0]; p = .049) among households that had animal waste management plans compared to those that did not. None of the variables investigated were significant predictors of pediatric diarrhea.
Conclusions
Ongoing surveillance is needed to develop estimates of diarrhea incidence among smallholder families and their livestock. The impact of different animal management strategies on the potential pathogen exposure of smallholders warrants further investigations. Improving sanitation infrastructure and animal waste management strategies is recommended.
Funder
University of Tennessee Center for Global Engagement’s W.K. McClure Scholarship Fund for the Study of World Affairs
University of Tennessee Graduate Student Senate
Subject
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience
Reference51 articles.
1. Health risk perceptions and local knowledge of water-related infectious disease exposure among Kenyan wetland communities;Anthonj;International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health,2019
2. Molecular identification of giardia duodenalis in ecuador by polymerase chain reaction- estriction fragment length polymorphism;Atherton;Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz,2013
3. Le lait des Andes vaut-il de l ’ or ? Logiques paysannes et insertion marchande de la production fromagère andine To cite this version : HAL Id : tel-00102383 Présentée par Claire Aubron Discipline : Agriculture Comparée Le lait des Andes vaut-il de l ’ o. Sciences de la Terre;Aubron,2006
4. Labor and its productivity in andean dairy farming systems: a comparative approach;Aubron;Human Ecology,2009
5. Coxiella burnetii seroprevalence and associated risk factors in dairy and mixed cattle farms from Ecuador;Carbonero;Preventive Veterinary Medicine,2015
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献