Volume 17, Number 5—May 2011
Dispatch
Multitarget Test for Emerging Lyme Disease and Anaplasmosis in a Serosurvey of Dogs, Maine, USA
Peter W. Rand
, Eleanor H. Lacombe, Susan P. Elias, Bruce K. Cahill, Charles B. Lubelczyk, and Robert P. Smith
, Eleanor H. Lacombe, Susan P. Elias, Bruce K. Cahill, Charles B. Lubelczyk, and Robert P. SmithTable 2
Risk factors vs. canine seroprevalence of Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Borrelia burgdorferi, Maine, USA, 2007*
| Variable |
No. dogs |
Borrelia burgdorferi | Anaplasma phagocytophilum | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. (%) positive |
OR (95% CI) |
p value† |
No. (%) positive |
OR (95% CI) |
p value† |
|||
| Lyme vaccine | ||||||||
| Yes | 575 | 57 (9.9) | 49 (8.5) | |||||
| No |
483 |
75 (15.3) |
1.5 (1.1–2.1) |
0.008 |
23 (4.8) |
0.6 (0.3–0.9) |
0.02 |
|
| Travel‡ | ||||||||
| All dogs | ||||||||
| None | 357 | 49 (13.7) | 27 (7.6) | |||||
| >1 |
730 |
89 (12.2) |
0.9 (0.6–1.3) |
NS |
50 (6.9) |
0.9 (0.6–1.5) |
NS |
|
| Unvaccinated dogs | ||||||||
| None | 163 | 21 (12.9) | 8 (4.9) | |||||
| >1 |
320 |
53 (16.6) |
1.3 (0.8–2.3) |
NS |
15 (4.7) |
0.9 (0.4–2.3) |
NS |
|
| Tick control products | ||||||||
| All dogs | ||||||||
| No | 182 | 20 (11.0) | 7 (3.9) | |||||
| Yes | 899 | 115 (12.9) | 1.2 (0.7–2.0) | NS | 66 (7.4) | 2.0 (0.9–4.4) | 0.08 | |
| Unvaccinated dogs | ||||||||
| No | 124 | 13 (10.5) | 3 (2.4) | |||||
| Yes |
350 |
59 (16.9) |
1.7 (0.9–3.3) |
0.09 |
18 (5.1) |
2.2 (0.6–7.6) |
NS |
|
| History of unexplained lameness | ||||||||
| No | 877 | 97 (11.1) | 42 (4.8) | |||||
| Yes | 191 | 40 (20.9) | 2.1 (1.4–3.2) | 0.0002 | 28 (15.2) | 3.6 (2.1–5.9) | <0.0001 | |
*A total of 1,087 dogs were tested. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NS, not significant.
†Significance based on Pearson χ2 statistic with 1 degree of freedom.
‡Trips away from town of residence.
