Ecological and behavioural risk factors of scrub typhus in central Vietnam: a case-control study

Table 3 Risk factors of scrub typhus resulting from the conditional multivariable logistic regression

Risk factors	Cases (n = 44)	Controls (n = 152)	mOR (95% CI)^a	aOR (95% CI)^b	P-value
Risk factors	n (%)	n (%)	mOR (95% CI)^a	aOR (95% CI)^b	P-value
Sitting/laying directly on household floor	23 (52.3%)	40 (26.7%)	3.9 (1.7–8.7)0.328779	4.9 (1.6–15.1)	0.006
Use of personal protective equipment in the field	14 (31.8%)	86 (56.6%)	0.3 (0.2–0.7)	0.4 (0.1–1.1)	0.076
Household with poor sanitation/conditions	41 (93.2%)	96 (63.2%)	8.4 (2.4–29.1)	7.9 (1.9–32.9)	0.005
Workplace environment with risk	30 (68.18%)	58 (38.16%)	3.6 (1.7–7.7)	3.0 (1.2–7.6)	0.020
Always observing mice around home	21 (47.73%)	37 (24.34%)	3.1 (1.5–6.6)	3.7 (1.4–9.9)	0.008
Sex (males)	27 (61.4%)	65 (42.8%)	2.0 (1.0–4.1)	1.4 (0.5–3.8)	0.518

The model adjusted for: sex, field work group, use of personal protective equipment in the field, urinating in the forest/near bushes/field, using the same work clothes the next day, changing clothes when at home, always observing of mice around home, raising cattle, seeing chickens that you raise have mites, passing riverside, sitting/laying directly on household floor, household with poor sanitation/conditions, household surroundings with risk, workplace environment with risk
^amOR, matching odds ratio, using univariable conditional logistic regression; ^baOR, adjusted odds ratio, using multivariable conditional logistic regression

ISSN: 2049-9957