Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThomas, Kate
dc.contributor.authorde Glanville, William
dc.contributor.authorBarker, Gary
dc.contributor.authorBenschop, Jackie
dc.contributor.authorBuza, Joram
dc.contributor.authorCleaveland, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Margaret
dc.contributor.authorMmbaga, Blandina
dc.contributor.authorPrinsen, Gerard
dc.contributor.authorSwai, Emmanuel
dc.contributor.authorZadoks, Ruth
dc.contributor.authorCrump, John
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-11T11:08:44Z
dc.date.available2023-09-11T11:08:44Z
dc.date.issued2019-10-31
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2019.108382
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.nm-aist.ac.tz/handle/20.500.12479/1962
dc.descriptionThis research article was published by Elsevier in 2019en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Campylobacter and Salmonella, particularly non-typhoidal Salmonella, are important bacterial en- teric pathogens of humans which are often carried asymptomatically in animal reservoirs. Bacterial foodborne infections, including those derived from meat, are associated with illness and death globally but the burden is disproportionately high in Africa. Commercial meat production is increasing and intensifying in many African countries, creating opportunities and threats for food safety. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched six databases for English language studies published through June 2016, that reported Campylobacter or Salmonella carriage or infection prevalence in food animals and contamination prevalence in food animal products from African countries. A random effects meta-analysis and multivariable logistic re- gression were used to estimate the species-specific prevalence of Salmonella and Campylobacter and assess re- lationships between sample type and region and the detection or isolation of either pathogen. Results: Seventy-three studies reporting Campylobacter and 187 studies reporting Salmonella across 27 African countries were represented. Adjusted prevalence calculations estimate Campylobacter detection in 37.7% (95% CI 31.6–44.3) of 11,828 poultry samples; 24.6% (95% CI 18.0–32.7) of 1975 pig samples; 17.8% (95% CI 12.6–24.5) of 2907 goat samples; 12.6% (95% CI 8.4–18.5) of 2382 sheep samples; and 12.3% (95% CI 9.5–15.8) of 6545 cattle samples. Salmonella were detected in 13.9% (95% CI 11.7–16.4) of 25,430 poultry samples; 13.1% (95% CI 9.3–18.3) of 5467 pig samples; 9.3% (95% CI 7.2–12.1) of 2988 camel samples; 5.3% (95% CI 4.0–6.8) of 72,292 cattle samples; 4.8% (95% CI 3.6–6.3) of 11,335 sheep samples; and 3.4% (95% CI 2.2–5.2) of 4904 goat samples. ‘External’ samples (e.g. hide, feathers) were significantly more likely to be contaminated by both pathogens than ‘gut’ (e.g. faeces, cloaca) while meat and organs were significantly less likely to be contaminated than gut samples. Conclusions: This study demonstrated widespread prevalence of Campylobacter species and Salmonella serovars in African food animals and meat, particularly in samples of poultry and pig origin. Source attribution studies could help ascertain which food animals are contributing to human campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis and direct potential food safety interventions.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.subjectCampylobacteren_US
dc.subjectFood animalsen_US
dc.subjectFood safetyen_US
dc.subjectSalmonellen_US
dc.titlePrevalence of Campylobacter and Salmonella in African food animals and meat: A systematic review and meta-analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record