Experience of Lyme disease and preferences for precautions: a cross-sectional survey of UK patients

BMC Public Health

Susan O’Connell¹  Konstantina Vasileiou²  David Uzzell³  Julie Barnett²  Afrodita Marcu² 

[1] Formerly at the Lyme Borreliosis Unit, Health Protection Agency Microbiology Laboratory, Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK;Department of Information Systems and Computing, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, UK;School of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK

关键词: Ticks;    Precautionary measures;    Behaviour;    Prevention;    Lyme disease;   

Others  :  1162200
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-481

 received in 2012-11-20, accepted in 2013-05-09,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Lyme disease (LD) is a tick-borne zoonosis currently affecting approximately 1000 people annually in the UK (confirmed through serological diagnosis) although it is estimated that the real figures may be as high as 3000 cases. It is important to know what factors may predict correct appraisal of LD symptoms and how the experience of LD might predict preferences for future precautionary actions.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with early LD patients via the Lyme Borreliosis Unit at the Health Protection Agency. One hundred and thirty participants completed measures of awareness of having been bitten by ticks, knowledge of ticks and LD, interpretation of LD symptoms, suspicions of having LD prior to seeing the General Practitioner (GP), and preferences for precautionary actions during future countryside visits. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to identify key predictors of awareness of having been bitten by ticks and of having LD. t-tests assessed differences between groups of participants on suspicions of having LD and preferences for future precautions. Pearson correlations examined relationships between measures of preferences for precautions and frequency of countryside use, knowledge of ticks and LD, and intentions to avoid the countryside in the future.

Results

73.8% of participants (n = 96) reported a skin rash as the reason for seeking medical help, and 44.1% (n = 64) suspected they had LD before seeing the GP. Participants reporting a direct event in realizing they had been bitten by ticks (seeing a tick on skin or seeing a skin rash and linking it to tick bites) were more likely to suspect they had LD before seeing the doctor. Participants distinguished between taking precautions against tick bites during vs. after countryside visits, largely preferring the latter. Also, the more frequently participants visited the countryside, the less likely they were to endorse during-visit precautions.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the risk of LD is set in the context of the restorative benefits of countryside practices, and that it may be counterproductive to overemphasize pre- or during-visit precautions. Simultaneously, having experienced LD is not associated with any withdrawal from countryside.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Marcu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Health Protection Agency: Lyme borreliosis in England and Wales 2011. http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/LymeDisease/EpidemiologicalData/lym010Lymeborreliosis2011/ webcite
• [2]Health Protection Scotland: Lyme disease, 10 year dataset. http://www.documents.hps.scot.nhs.uk/giz/10-year-tables/lyme.pdf webcite
• [3]Centre for Disease Control and Prevention: Reported Lyme disease cases by state, 2002–2011. http://www.cdc.gov/lyme/stats/chartstables/reportedcases_statelocality.html webcite
• [4]O’Connell S: Fortnightly review: Lyme disease in the United Kingdom. Brit Med J 1995, 310:303-308.
• [5]Dobson A, Taylor JL, Randolph SE: Tick (Ixodes ricinus) abundance and seasonality at recreational sites in the UK: Hazard in relation to fine-scale habitat types revealed by complementary sampling methods. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 2011, 2:67-74.
• [6]Marzano M, Moseley D, Quine CP, Barnett J: Organisational intentions and responses: presenting the risk of Lyme disease to countryside users. J Environ Plann Man 2013, 56:305-328.
• [7]Mawby TV, Lovett AA: The public health risks of Lyme disease in Breckland, UK: an investigation of environmental and social factors. Soc Sci Med 1998, 46:719-727.
• [8]Sheaves BJ, Brown RW: A Zoonosis as a health hazard in UK moorland recreational areas: a case study of Lyme disease. J Environ Plann Man 1995, 38:201-214.
• [9]Hallman W, Weinstein N, Kadakia S, Chess C: Precautions taken against Lyme disease at three recreational parks in endemic areas of New Jersey. Environ Behav 1995, 27:437-453.
• [10]Herrington JE: Risk perceptions regarding ticks and Lyme disease: a national survey. Am J Prev Med 2004, 26:135-140.
• [11]Shadick NA, Daltroy LH, Phillips CB, Liang US, Liang MH: Determinants of tick-avoidance behaviors in an endemic area for Lyme disease. Am J Prev Med 1997, 13:265-270.
• [12]Marcu A, Uzzell D, Barnett J: Making sense of unfamiliar risks in the countryside: the case of Lyme disease. Health Place 2011, 17:843-850.
• [13]Quine CP, Barnett J, Dobson ADM, Marcu A, Marzano M, Moseley D, O’Brien L, Randolph SE, Taylor JL, Uzzell D: Frameworks for risk communication and disease management: the case of Lyme disease and countryside users. Philos T R Soc B 2011, 366:2010-2022.
• [14]European Concerted Action on Lyme Borreliosis: Environmental Awareness Questionnaire. http://meduni09.edis.at/eucalb/cms/images/stories/environmentalq.htm webcite
• [15]Smith R, O’Connell S, Palmer S: Lyme disease surveillance in England and Wales, 1986–1998. Emerg Infect Dis 2000, 6:404-407.
• [16]Lovett JK, Evans PH, O’Connell S, Gutowski NJ: Neuroborreliosis in the South West of England. Epidemiol Infect 2008, 136:1707-1711.
• [17]Nadelman RB, Wormser GP: Lyme borreliosis. Lancet 1998, 352:557-565.
• [18]O’Connell S: Lyme borreliosis: current issues in diagnosis and management. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2010, 23:231-235.
• [19]Phillips CB, Liang MH, Sangha O, Wright EA, Fossel AH, Lew RA, Fossel KK, Shadick NA: Lyme disease and preventive behaviors in residents of Nantucket Island, Massachusetts. Am J Prev Med 2001, 20:219-224.
• [20]Aronowitz RA: Lyme disease: the social construction of a new disease and its social consequences. Milbank Q 1991, 69:79-112.
• [21]Sigal LH: Misconceptions about Lyme disease: confusions hiding behind ill-chosen terminology. Ann Intern Med 2002, 136:413-419.