Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34308177›Full record

ArticleThe East African health research journal2018

Occupational Practices and Hazards of Rural Livestock Keepers in Uganda: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Julianne Meisner, Kellie Curtis, Thomas Graham, Peter Rabinowitz

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The East African health research journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julianne MeisnerDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Kellie CurtisVeterinarians Without Borders, Davis, California, USA.
Thomas GrahamVeterinarians Without Borders, Davis, California, USA.
Peter RabinowitzCenter for One Health Research, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
University of Washington · USVeterinarians Without Borders · US

Funding

NIOSH CDC HHS T42 OH008433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn Uganda, 70% of rural poor rely on livestock for subsistence, to meet social obligations, and to insure against disaster. Livestock farming in Africa is in a state of transition from traditional management systems toward intensified modern systems, calling into question the future of traditional systems. To inform this debate, we conducted a survey in Moyo District, Uganda, to describe occupational practices and hazards of agropastoralist livestock keepers.

methodsHousehold surveys were administered to heads of household (N=49) from July to September 2016. Cross-sectional data were used to generate descriptive statistics for livestock-associated practices and exposures. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios and Wald-type 95% confidence intervals for risk factors for injury, defined as any animal-related injury in the household in the past year. Risk factors studied were total number of male animals; number of male cattle, sheep/goats, and pigs; proportion male by herd size; herd size; and castration practices.

resultsAdult men perform most livestock-associated tasks, while women, girls, and boys prepare meat, milk cattle, care for poultry, and dispose of waste. While 31 (63%) of households use professional veterinary services and most (n=28, 57.2%) are familiar with zoonoses, 25 (53.2%) do not believe sick animals may look healthy. Over 85.0% (n=41) of respondents routinely wash their hands, while only 31 (64.6%) use soap. Twenty-eight (57.0%) reported using personal protective equipment, while none used gloves or face protection. Most respondents had contact with animal waste "often", and had contact with urine and blood "sometimes". Six (12%) reported a needlestick injury while treating an animal, and 22 (45%) reported at least 1 injury from an animal. No significant association was found between the risk factors studied and animal injury, after adjustment for confounders.

conclusionsOccupational risks for female and young agropastoralists are distinct from those of men. Contact with potentially infectious material is common and current practices - handwashing without soap and low glove use - do little to prevent zoonotic transmission. While agropastoralists are familiar with zoonoses, subclinical infections may be missed. While no significant risk factors were identified for animal injury, both animal and needlestick injuries are common. As livestock agriculture intensifies, these hazards will become more pronounced; drivers of risk behavior and animal injury must be identified to inform interventions to improve the occupational health of rural livestock keepers in Uganda.

Identifiers

PMID34308177
PMCPMC8279279
OpenAlexW2998051426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.