Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

Volume 13, Number 9—September 2007

Dispatch

Risk Factors for Hantavirus Infection in Germany, 2005

Muna Abu Sin*, Klaus Stark*, Ulrich van Treeck†, Helga Dieckmann‡, Helmut Uphoff§, Wolfgang Hautmann¶, Bernhard Bornhofen#, Evelin Jensen**, Günter Pfaff††, and Judith Koch*Comments to Author 
Author affiliations: *Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany; †Institute of Public Health, Muenster, North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany; ‡Regional Health Authority, Hanover, Lower Saxony, Germany; §Government Health Service Institute, Dillenburg, Hesse, Germany; ¶Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Munich, Bavaria, Germany; #Institute for Hygiene and Infection Control, Landau, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany; **Thuringian State Authority for Food Safety and Consumer Protection, Erfurt, Thuringia, Germany; ††State Health Office, Stuttgart, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany;

Main Article

Table 1

Univariate matched analysis for exposure variables for hantavirus infection, conditional logistic regression, Germany, 2005*

Exposure Case-patients, no. (%) Controls, no. (%) Matched OR 95% CI p value
Noticing mice 75 (50.0) 48 (32.0) 2.5 1.4–4.5 <0.01
In forested areas 28 (18.7) 4 (2.7) 13.0 3.3–113.0 <0.01
Noticing mice droppings 43 (28.7) 21 (14.0) 2.5 1.3–5.0 <0.01
Living <100 m from forested areas 65 (43.3) 39 (26.0) 2.3 1.3–4.1 <0.01
Being a forestry worker 18 (12.2) 8 (5.4) 2.7 1.0–8.3 0.05
Being a construction worker 17 (11.5) 5 (3.4) 4.0 1.3–16.4 0.01
Entering empty rooms or buildings 26 (17.3) 10 (6.7) 2.8 1.3–6.8 0.01
Cutting or handling wood 35 (23.3) 21 (14.0) 2.0 1.0–4.2 0.05
Gardening 85 (56.7) 98 (65.8) 0.7 0.4–1.1 0.14

*OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Main Article

TOP