Abstract
Background: Zoonotic diseases account for 60% of infectious diseases worldwide. The lack of effective control of the human-animal interface puts the people working in these settings at high risk of zoonotic disease infection, thus requiring an assessment of their OHS knowledge, awareness and practices related to preventing zoonotic diseases.
Methods: A cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted through a self-administered questionnaire developed for the study and distributed to all 137 North West Department of Agriculture-Veterinary Service fieldworkers exposed to animals and their biological products through their daily work activities. The questionnaire included demographic factors, questions on OHS training, knowledge, awareness and practices, the prevalence of zoonotic disease exposure/infections and risk factors, vaccination status and required OHS improvements. The response was obtained from 105 workers, and these were analysed using SPSS version 28 data analysis software to determine frequency distributions of all factors. Chi-squared tests were used to determine the difference in OHS knowledge, awareness and practices between the different occupational groups; and if there is a difference in zoonotic disease/infection prevalence between demographic factors and OHS practices. Lastly, logistic regression analysis was used to determine crude and adjusted odds ratio to assess if the vaccinated participants had the same odds of exposure to the unvaccinated participants using demographic factors and exposure to zoonotic disease risk factors.
Results: A total of 105 participants took part in the study, of which 76.2% (n=80) were animal health technicians, 12.2% (n=13) were veterinary public health officers and 11.4% (n=12) were veterinarians. More than 50% of the participants correctly described zoonoses (94.3%, n=99), pathogens (58.1%, n=61) and hazards (67.6%, n=71). Less than 25% of the participants reported having received OHS (21%, n=22), biosecurity (22.9%, n=24) or biosafety training (13.3%, n=14), with only 19% (n=20) being aware of related policies/guidelines. Most participants had good OHS practices for reporting accidents (63.8%, n=67) and identified hazards (97.1%, n=102), with 86.7% (n=91) and 76.2% (n=80) reporting always using overalls and safety boots when doing fieldwork. A difference in OHS knowledge and practices was witnessed between the occupational groups for internal (p=0.008) and external (p=0.005) training; knowledge on the description of rabies (p=0.040), Listeria monocytogenes (p=0.007); and reporting identified
v
hazards (p<0.001). The veterinary public health officers group had the highest proportion of participants who had not received internal (84.6%, 11/13) and external (100%, 13/13) training, while the veterinarian group had the lowest proportion of participants who had not recieved internal (41.7%, 5/12) and external (7%, 4/12) training. There were 91% (73/80) of animal health technicians who correctly described rabies, while in the veterinarian group, only 66.7% (8/12) correctly identified the variable. The participants stated that they needed OHS improvement on their knowledge and awareness (84.8%, n=89), training (72.4%, n=76) and availability of PPE (62.9%, n=66). Participants were most often exposed to Brucellosis (69.5%, n=73), animal vaccines (80%, n=84), other potentially infectious material (82.9%, n=87) and sharps injuries (74.3%, n=78). Zoonotic disease infections were reported by 5.7% of participants. A few participants were vaccinated, 35.2% for Rabies and 2.9% for Tetanus and Anthrax. The participants in the DRSM and Bojanala districts were 86% (aOR=0.142, 95% CI: 0.020-0.992) and 96% (aOR=0.042, 95% CI: 0.004-0.457), respectively, less likely to be vaccinated. Participants who were less often exposed to other potentially infectious material were 12% less likely to be vaccinated (aOR=0.850, 95% CI:1.110-64.739).
Conclusion: The study showed a difference in knowledge, awareness and practices between the different occupational groups, attributed to the different levels of received training. Zoonotic disease prevalence was very low, making zoonotic disease infections uncommon among the fieldworkers, despite more than 70% of the participants being regularly exposed to zoonotic disease risk factors and low vaccination status. This low prevalence was possibly attributed to the under-reporting and misdiagnosis of zoonotic diseases.
Keywords: veterinary OHS, occupational zoonosis, OHS knowledge, awareness and practices