Table 6.
Aspatial logistic regression applied to variables with dogs seropositivity to leptospirosis.
| Variables | Positive n (%) | Negative n (%) | Total N | OR | 95% CI | p- value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dogs | ||||||||
| Income | ≤ 1 MW | 37 (21.9) | 132 (78.1) | 169 | 1.05 | 0.69–1.59 | 0.447 | |
| > 1 MWR | 118 (21.1) | 442 (78.9) | 560 | |||||
| * | Accumulated water | Yes | 25 (26.0) | 71 (74.0) | 96 | 1.36 | 0.83–2.24 | 0.137 |
| NoR | 130 (20.5) | 503 (79.5) | 633 | |||||
| Open sewage | Yes | 12 (21.1) | 45 (78.9) | 57 | 0.99 | 0.51–1.91 | 0.562 | |
| NoR | 143 (21.3) | 529 (78.7) | 672 | |||||
| ** | Exposed garbage | Yes | 104 (19.4) | 431 (80.6) | 535 | 0.68 | 0.46–0.99 | 0.030 |
| NoR | 51 (26.3) | 143 (73.7) | 194 | |||||
| Wasteland | Yes | 80 (21.3) | 296 (78.7) | 376 | 1.00 | 0.70–1.43 | 0.532 | |
| NoR | 75 (21.2) | 278 (78.8) | 353 | |||||
| ** | Sex | Female | 71 (17.4) | 336 (82.6) | 407 | 1.49 | 1.13–1.97 | 0.003 |
| MaleR | 84 (26.1) | 238 (73.9) | 322 | |||||
| Bathroom outside | Yes | 28 (20.7) | 107 (79.3) | 135 | 0.97 | 0.61–1.53 | 0.493 | |
| NoR | 126 (21.3) | 465 (78.7) | 591 | |||||
| Presence of rats | Yes | 116 (20.6) | 446 (79.4) | 562 | 0.85 | 0.56–1.29 | 0.258 | |
| NoR | 39 (23.4) | 128 (76.6) | 167 | |||||
| * | Street Access | Yes | 93 (24.0) | 294 (76.0) | 387 | 1.43 | 0.99–2.05 | 0.052 |
| NoR | 62 (18.1) | 280 (81.9) | 342 | |||||
| Hunting Habit | Yes | 69 (21.6) | 250 (78.4) | 319 | 1.04 | 0.73–1.49 | 0.830 | |
| NoR | 86 (21.0) | 324 (79.0) | 410 | |||||
| ** | Presence of equines | Yes | 15 (60.0) | 10 (40.0) | 25 | 6.04 | 2.66–13.74 | 0.001 |
| NoR | 140 (19.9) | 564 (80.1) | 704 | |||||
| * | Presence of bovines | Yes | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | 3 | 7.49 | 0.67–83.15 | 0.116 |
| NoR | 153 (21.1) | 573 (78.9) | 726 | |||||
| ** | Presence of opossums | Yes | 3 (75.0) | 1 (25.0) | 4 | 11.31 | 1.17–109.49 | 0.032 |
| NoR | 152 (21.0) | 573 (79.0) | 725 | |||||
| *** | Presence of other positive dogs | Yes | 0 (0.0) | 50 (100.0) | 50 | - | - | - |
| NoR | 155 (22.8) | 524 (77.7) | 679 | |||||
| * | Clinical sign: vomit and/or diarrhea | Yes | 21 (17.1) | 102 (82.9) | 123 | 0.73 | 0.44–1.20 | 0.129 |
| NoR | 134 (22.1) | 472 (77.9) | 606 | |||||
| Dirty backyard | Yes | 62 (20.3) | 244 (79.7) | 306 | 0.90 | 0.63–1.29 | 0.320 | |
| NoR | 93 (22.0) | 330 (78.0) | 423 | |||||
| ** | Nearby forest | Yes | 33 (29.5) | 79 (70.5) | 112 | 1.69 | 1.08–2.66 | 0.017 |
| NoR | 122 (19.8) | 495 (80.2) | 617 | |||||
| Contact with other domestic animal | Yes | 124 (21.0) | 467 (79.0) | 591 | 0.92 | 0.59–1.43 | 0.390 | |
| NoR | 31 (22.5) | 107 (77.5) | 138 | |||||
| Presence of dogs | Yes | 115 (20.9) | 434 (79.1) | 549 | 0.93 | 0.62–1.39 | 0.395 | |
| NoR | 40 (22.2) | 140 (77.8) | 180 | |||||
| Clinical sign: weight loss | Yes | 16 (23.9) | 51 (76.1) | 67 | 1.18 | 0.65–2.13 | 0.583 | |
| NoR | 139 (21.0) | 523 (79.0) | 662 | |||||
| Final logistic model | Adjusted-OR | 95 CI adjusted-OR | p-value (Wald test) | |||||
| Presence of equines | 0.19 | 0.08–0.43 | <0.001 | |||||
| Sex (female) | 1.67 | 1.17–2.23 | 0.019 | |||||
| Exposed garbage | 1.51 | 1.02–2.23 | 0.041 | |||||
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of dogs positive for Leptospira from July 2015 to July 2016 in the urban area of Londrina, Southern Brazil.
There was no significant interactions between co-variates of the final model.
*
Variables included in the logistic models.
**
There was no sufficient expose and no expose to proceed the analysis.
***
There was no sufficient animals to calculate.
MW, minimum wage.
R
Reference category.