| dc.description.abstract |
Abstract; Background: Uganda has experienced seven Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreaks and four Marburg Virus disease (MVD) outbreaks between 2000 and 2019. We investigated the seroprevalence and risk factors for Marburg virus and ebolaviruses in gold mining communities around Kitaka gold mine in Western Uganda, and compared them to non-mining communities in Central Uganda.Methods: A questionnaire was administered and human blood samples were collected from three exposure groups in Western Uganda (gold miners, household members of miners, non-miners living within 50 km of Kitaka mine). The unexposed controls group sampled was community members in Central Uganda far away from any gold mining activity which we considered as low-risk for filovirus infection. ELISA serology was used to analyse samples, detecting IgG antibodies against Marburg virus and ebolaviruses (filoviruses). Data was analysed in STATA software using risk ratios and odds ratios. Results: Miners in western Uganda were 5.4 times more likely to be filovirus seropositive compared to the control group in central Uganda (RR=5.4; 95% CI 1.5 – 19.7) whereas people living in high-risk areas in Ibanda and Kamwenge disricts were 3.6 more likely to be seropositive compared to control group in Luweeero district (RR=3.6; 95% CI 1.1 – 12.2) . Among all participants, filovirus seropositivity was 2.6% (19/724) of which 2.5% (18/724) was to Sudan virus and 0.1 % (1/724) to Marburg virus. One individual seropositive for Sudan virus also had IgG antibodies reactive to Bundibugyo virus. The risk factors for filovirus seropositivity identified included mining (AOR=3.4; 95% CI 1.3-8.5), male sex (AOR=3.1; 95% CI 1.01 - 9.5), going inside mines (AOR=3.1; 95% CI 1.2 - 8.2), cleaning corpses (AOR=3.1; 95% CI 1.04 - 9.1) and contact with suspect filovirus cases (AOR=3.9, 95% CI 1.04 -14.5). Conclusions: These findings indicate that filovirus outbreaks may go undetected in Uganda and people involved in artisan gold mining are more likely to be exposed to infection with either Marburg virus or ebolaviruses, likely due to increased risk of exposure to bats. This calls for active surveillance in known high-risk areas for early detection and response to prevent filovirus epidemics. |
|