Objective: Leptospirosis is one of the most common zoonotic diseases worldwide. Transmission to humans usually occurs by mucosal inoculation of the bacteria or exposure of non-intact skin via contact with water or soil contaminated with urine or feces of rodents. Occupational groups such as farmers, rice plant workers, sewer workers, miners, hunters, military personnel, mariners, shepherds, milkers, slaughterhouse workers, veterinarians and laboratory personnel are under risk for leptospirosis. In this study, we aimed to determine the seroprevalence of leptospirosis in coal miners in Zonguldak region.

Methods: Blood samples were obtained from total 185 volunteer coal miners, who worked in 5 coal mines of Turkish Hard Coal Authority in Zonguldak and Bartın provinces, during June and July 2013. Serum samples were stored at -80°C. Additionally, we conducted an interview with each miner about demographical and epidemiological data such as age, location, duration of mining, other occupations, observing rodent or rodent excreta in the mine, noticing rodent contact with personal belongings or drinks or food in mine and hand hygiene compliance. Microscopic agglutination test (MAT), the reference diagnostic test for seroepidemiological studies of leptospirosis, was conducted in Spirochetal Diseases Diagnostic Laboratory, Veterinary Control Central Research Institute, Etlik, Ankara in June 2014. Anti-Leptospira antibody levels for 8 serotypes (Leptospira grippotyphosa Moskva V, L. australis Bratislava Jez Bratislava, L. canicola Hund Utrech IV, L. hardjo Hardjoprajitno,L. pomona Pomona, L. icterohaemorrhagiae Ictero 1, L. hebdomadis Hebdomadis ve L. patoc Patoc 1) was investigated with MAT.

Results: All the miners were male and the mean age was 36±6. The mean duration of working in underground part of the mine was 11±6 years, the mean working hours was 44±6 hours a week on average. Distribution of the miners according to inhabiting location was 18.5% village, 50.3% county and 30.8% city. In addition to mining, some of the miners were also occupied with farming (7%), hunting (2.7%), seafaring (0.5%) and livestock raising (0.5%). 82.7% of the miners confirmed seeing rodents in the mine every day and 35.7% of the miners confirmed seeing rodent excreta in the mine. 68.1% reported observing sign of rodent bite on their clothes or food saving box. 91.9% of the miners reported that they saved their food in plastic or paper bags up to meal time. Hand washing rate in the mine was 76.2% among the miners and 94.3% of those were washing their hands without soap. Although, a risky environment for leptospirosis was defined, no seropositivity was detected in any of the serum samples of the miners.

Conclusions: Miners reported risky environmental conditions and risky behavioral models for transmission of leptospirosis. However, no seropositivity was detected in any of the serum samples obtained from 185 miners in Zonguldak region. Klimik Dergisi 2019; 32(2): 174-7.

Cite this article as: Yılmaz Ö, Çelebi G, Atabek E, et al. [Seroprevalence of leptospirosis in coal miners in Zonguldak region]. Klimik Derg. 2019; 32(2): 174-7. Turkish.

Volume 37, Issue 3 Volume 37, Issue 2 Volume 37, Issue 1 Volume 36, Issue 4 Volume 36, Supplement 1 Volume 36, Issue 3 Volume 36, Issue 2 Volume 36, Issue 1 Volume 35, Issue 4 Volume 35, Issue 3 Volume 35, Issue 2 Volume 35, Issue 1 Volume 34, Issue 3 Volume 34, Issue 2 Volume 34, Issue 1 Volume 33, Issue 3 Volume 33, Issue 2 Volume 33, Issue 1 Volume 32, Issue 3 Volume 32, Supplement 1 Volume 32, Supplement 2 Volume 32, Issue 2 Volume 32, Issue 1 Volume 31, Issue 3 Volume 31, Issue 2 Volume 31, Supplement 1 Volume 31, Issue 1 Volume 30, Issue 3 Volume 30, Issue 2 Volume 30, Supplement 1 Volume 30, Issue 1 Volume 29, Issue 3 Volume 29, Issue 2 Volume 29, Issue 1 Volume 28, Supplement 1 Volume 28, Issue 3 Volume 28, Issue 2 Volume 28, Issue 1 Volume 27, Supplement 1 Volume 27, Issue 3 Volume 27, Issue 2 Volume 27, Issue 1 Volume 26, Issue 3 Volume 26, Supplement 1 Volume 26, Issue 2 Volume 26, Issue 1 Volume 25, Issue 3 Volume 25, Issue 2 Volume 25, Issue 1 Volume 24, Issue 3 Volume 24, Issue 2 Volume 24, Issue 1 Volume 23, Issue 3 Volume 23, Issue 2 Volume 23, Issue 1 Volume 22, Issue 3 Volume 22, Issue 2 Volume 22, Issue 1 Volume 21, Issue 3 Volume 21, Supplement 2 Volume 21, Supplement 1 Volume 21, Issue 2 Volume 21, Issue 1 Volume 20, Issue 3 Volume 20, Supplement 2 Volume 20, Issue 2 Volume 20, Issue 1 Volume 20, Supplement 1 Volume 19, Issue 3 Volume 19, Issue 2 Volume 19, Issue 1 Volume 18, Issue 3 Volume 18, Supplement 1 Volume 18, Issue 2 Volume 18, Issue 1 Volume 17, Issue 3 Volume 17, Issue 2 Volume 17, Issue 1 Volume 16, Issue 3 Volume 16, Issue 2 Volume 16, Issue 1 Volume 1, Supplement 1 Volume 15, Issue 3 Volume 15, Issue 2 Volume 15, Issue 1 Volume 14, Issue 3 Volume 14, Issue 2 Volume 14, Issue 1 Volume 13, Issue 3 Volume 13, Issue 2 Volume 13, Supplement 1 Volume 13, Issue 1 Volume 12, Issue 3 Volume 12, Issue 2 Volume 12, Issue 1 Volume 11, Issue 3 Volume 11, Issue 2 Volume 11, Supplement 1 Volume 11, Issue 1 Volume 10, Issue 3 Volume 10, Issue 2 Volume 10, Issue 1 Volume 9, Issue 3 Volume 9, Issue 2 Volume 9, Issue 1 Volume 8, Issue 3 Volume 8, Issue 2 Volume 8, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 3 Volume 7, Issue 1 Volume 7, Issue 2 Volume 7, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 3 Volume 5, Issue 1 Volume 5, Issue 2 Volume 5, Issue 3 Volume 6, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 1 Volume 3, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 1 Volume 4, Issue 2 Volume 1, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 1 Volume 2, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 3 Volume 1, Issue 1