Volume 26, Number 1—January 2020
Risk Factors for and Seroprevalence of Tickborne Zoonotic Diseases among Livestock Owners, Kazakhstan
|Human–tick interactions||No. respondents||% Respondents (95% CI)|
|Had a tick bite†||17||1.0 (0.3–3.3)|
|Handled tick with bare hands†
|Method of tick disposal after bare hand removal, n = 27|
|Threw it out||1||3.2 (0.3–29.3)|
|Killed with bare hands†||1||0.5 (0–5.9)|
|Killed with object||16||93.6 (69.2–99.0)|
|Number of tick bites in previous 4 mo
|Method of human tick bite prevention‡|
|Long, layered clothing||694||68.8 (55.2–79.9)|
|Pesticides in environment||267||13.8 (7.9–22.9)|
|Insect repellent on self, clothing||155||17.7 (10.0–29.3)|
|Avoiding woody areas||133||12.2 (4.1–31.0)|
|Avoiding unnecessary animal contact
|Found ticks on livestock||486||29.7 (19.6–42.3)|
|Primary method used to remove ticks on livestock|
|Bare hands†||12||4.3 (1.2–15.0)|
|Gloved hands||95||29.8 (15.9–48.7)|
|With an object||291||51.7 (34.0–69.0)|
|Go to a clinic||15||3.3 (1.2–8.7)|
|Pour liquid mixture on animal||32||3.0 (1.2–7.1)|
|Burn the tick||6||0.7 (0.2–2.2)|
|Leave the tick||31||6.8 (2.6–16.3)|
|Use tick medication for animals||905||94.0 (76.0–98.8)|
*Percentage weighted by calculating the inverse probability of selection and applying a poststratification adjustment to each stratum to account for nonresponses.
†High-risk tick interaction.
‡>1 response possible.
Page created: December 18, 2019
Page updated: December 18, 2019
Page reviewed: December 18, 2019
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.