|
The authors wish to thank
Eileen Bowden for coordinating participation by local unions and for scheduling
field work for the study.
Study
Methods
- Participant Selection
- Technical Description
of Lyme Disease Tests
- Enzyme-linked
immunoabsorbent assay
- Electrophoresis
and immunoblotting,
Results
- Potential Factors
- Indoor and
outdoor work
- Worker age
- Length of
time worked outdoors or indoors
- Outdoor hobbies
Tables
-
Average ages of indoor and outdoor workers who tested positive and negative
for Lyme disease
-
Time worked indoors or outdoors for workers testing positive and negative
for Lyme disease
-
Positive Lyme disease test results compared with reported outdoor recreation
Discussion
- The Role of
Time Employed Outdoors
- The Role of
Outdoor Recreation
Recommendations
References
Lyme Disease, Borrelia
burgdorferi infection, is the most common vector-borne disease in
North America and Europe. This infectious disease is widespread in areas
where deer ticks are endemic. In the United States, the disease was reported
in 43 of the 50 states in 1995 (CDC 1995). However, the vast majority
of cases come from the northeast, mid-Atlantic, and north central regions:
Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin (CDC 1996).
Lyme disease is
progressive. Infection with B. burgdorferi produces a wide array
of clinical abnormalities, major target organ systems being the skin,
musculoskeletal system, and nervous system. The clinical presentation
is variable; not everyone has the same signs and symptoms of infection.
Some individuals may not show signs of disease until months or years after
initial infection. Infection originates at the site of a tick bite with
the spirochete disseminating through the blood supply early on, seeding
all major organ systems, such as the heart, brain, muscles, and joints.
Later, the disease can enter a latent phase or go on to a chronic phase
where there are few, if any, systematic signs and symptoms.
Ticks are most commonly
found in brush, wooded areas, and tall grass. Individuals working or playing
in these areas are at high risk for tick bites and infection. New York
State has the largest number of reported Lyme disease cases in the United
States, with Suffolk and Westchester Counties having the highest rate
of disease in the state. Studies show that outdoor workers in endemic
areas have far greater incidence of infection than the general population
(Smith and others 1988; Madal, Wunderli, Briner and Hansen 1989; Doby,
Couatarmanac'h, Fages, and Chevrier 1989; Fahrer and others 1991). Studies
of National Park Service employees working on Long Island's National Seashore
recreational area demonstrated that 15 percent or more acquired the disease
each year in the 1980s (Lyme Disease Center 1989-95). Studies from the
Netherlands also have found that outdoor workers in endemic areas incur
a significant increased risk of exposure (Kuiper and others 1991, 1993).
Investigations of the membership of two Long Island construction trade
unions, local unions 25 and 1049 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers (IBEW), have identified positive Lyme disease test results at
rates significantly above that for the general population in both counties
(Long Island Occupational and Environmental Health Center 1990-94).
To build on the
earlier study of IBEW members, the Building and Construction Trades Council
(BCTC) of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, in collaboration with staff of
the Long Island Occupational and Environmental Health Center and the Lyme
Disease Center -- both at the State University of New York at Stony Brook
-- conducted a pilot study of the prevalence
Participation Selection
The Building and
Construction Trades Council, with input from its member affiliates, generated
lists of approximately 10,000 potential study participants, including
carpenters, electricians, operating engineers, iron workers, laborers,
sheet metal workers, plumbers, and painters. Each person on the list could
be classified as working outdoors or indoors for the 6 months before the
start of the sample collection period, which began in July 1994. "Outdoor"
workers reported working solely outdoors during the 6 months; "indoor"
workers reported working solely indoors or predominantly indoors during
that time. After the BCTC staff assembled the lists, the researchers chose
a random sample of workers. (The sample included men and women but was
not balanced to reflect the proportion of women in the worker population.)
Each worker so selected
was contacted by telephone, had the study explained to him or her, and
was offered an opportunity to participate in the free Lyme disease screening
program. Of the sample of 556 workers, 408 attended. After the exclusion
of retirees and workers whose records were missing, tests were conducted
on 396 workers.
Screenings took
place at local union halls at scheduled times and dates. At the screenings,
first-year medical students explained the study to each worker and had
the worker sign a human-subject consent form. Each worker completed a
brief medical and occupational history and provided a history of known
tick bites, as well as other information pertaining to risk for tick exposure.
A blood sample of 5 milliliters was taken to allow for both analysis and
serum storage.
Technical Description
of Lyme Disease Tests
Enzyme-linked
immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA). An ELISA for antibodies to Borrelia
burgdorferi was performed with minor modifications. In brief, 96-well
microliter plates (from Immulon 4, Dynatech, Chantilly, Virginia) were
coated with a sonicate of B. burgdorferi (5 micrograms per milliliter
[µg/ml]) for 18 hours in a 0.05 molar sodium carbonate coating buffer
(pH 9.6) and then washed three times with Trisbuffered saline (pH7.5)
containing 0.05% Tween 20 (TBS/Tween). Excess binding sites on the wells
were blocked by postcoating the wells with 200 µl (microliters) of Trisbuffered
saline containing 5 percent nonfat milk (pH 7.5). The plates were washed
as described above. Serums from all three study groups were diluted to
1:100 in TBS/Tween. Aliquots of 100 µl each were added to duplicate wells
and incubated for two hours at 37° C or overnight at 4° C. The plates
were washed, and alkaline-phosphatase conjugated goat antihuman immunoglobulin
specific for light-chain and heavy-chain determinants was added to detect
bound immunoglobulin of all isotypes. After incubation for two hours at
37° C, the wells were again washed three times in TBS/Tween. Then p-nitrophenyl
phosphate (Sigma, St. Louis) at a concentration of 2 milligrams per milliliter
in 0.15 molar sodium bicarbonate containing l millimole magnesium chloride
was added to each well. Plates were incubated two hours at room temperature.
The optical density of each well at 410nm was measured on an ELISA reader
(Dynatech 5000, Dynatech) at 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, or until
negative controls reached a range of 0.075 - 0.100.
Electrophoresis
and immunoblotting (Western blot). B. burgdorferi organisms
of the B31 strain were grown in BSK 1 1 media and washed three times in
phosphate-buffered saline. Phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) is added to
pelleted spirochetes in a volume equal to the volume of the pellet. Borrelia
are usually dispensed in 100µl aliquots. Protein concentration is
measured according to a modified Bradford procedure. Average concentrations
range from 18mg/ml to 22mg/ml. The 100µl of Borrelia are mixed
with 150µl of sample buffer which is 10%SDS, 0.5M TRIS, pH6.8. Then 10%
B-2-mercaptoethanol is added and the mixture heated for 5 minutes at 95°
C. SDS-PAGE gel electrophoresis is performed using a 12% gel in a Bio-Rad
Protean 11 cell (Bio-Rad, Melville, NY). Western blotting is performed
using Immobilon PVDF (polyvinylidene difluoride) membrane (Millipore,
Bedford, Massachusetts) at 30 volts overnight, followed by 1 hour at 75
volts. Excess binding sites are blocked with phosphate-buffered saline
containing 5% milk and 0.05% Tween-20 (PBS/Tween/Milk), pH7.5 for two
hours. The PVDF membrane containing transferred proteins is then placed
into an Immunetics MN25 miniblotter apparatus (Immunetics, Cambridge,
Mass.). Serum samples are diluted 1:150 in PBS/Tween/Milk and applied
to the Immunetics device overnight at room temperature on a Hoefer red
rocker (Hoefer Scientific Instruments, San Francisco). Bound immunoglobulin
can be detected with a 1:1000 dilution of goat antihuman IgG (immunoglobin
gamma G), IgM (immunoglobin gamma M), or IgA (immunoglobin gamma A) conjugated
to alkaline phosphatase (Sigma) in PBS/Tween/Milk incubated for two hours
at room temperature . The blot is then washed once in PBS/Tween/Milk,
once in PBS/Tween, and once in O.lM Tris Buffer pH 7.2, followed by incubation
in the BCIP-NBT substrate system (5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indole phosphate-nitroblue
tetrazolium (Kirkegaard and Perry Laboratories, Gaithersburg, Maryland)
until color development is complete. The reaction is stopped by rinsing
the blots in dH20.
Of the 396 participants
tested, 43 (11%) were identified as Lyme-disease positive (on both the ELISA
and Western blot tests). Those testing positive were sent a letter offering
an evaluation at the Long Island Occupational and Environmental Health Center.
Thirty-nine individuals were evaluated and the other 4 chose to see their
own physicians. Of the 39 individuals evaluated, 3 were found to have evidence
of chronic Lyme disease and are being followed by the Lyme Disease Center
staff after a 6-week course of intravenous antibiotics. The remaining 36
were given oral antibiotics for 21 days.
Of the 43 workers
with positive test results, a tick bite was reported by only 12 on the
health survey. The remaining 31 either reported no evidence of tick bite
and feeding or that they were unable to recall a bite.
Potential Factors
Indoor and outdoor
work. Of the 143 individuals classified as indoor workers, 10 (7%)
tested positive. Of the 253 individuals classified as outdoor workers,
33 (13%) were Lyme positive. This difference in rates of Lyme positively
is highly significant with a value p<.001. Several possibilities exist
for this difference and analyses are in progress to elucidate the differences.
Worker age. The
average age of indoor workers who tested positive was 46.8 years compared
with 42.7 for the outdoor workers who tested positive (table
1).This difference was not significant.
The average age
of those testing negative was 44.2 and 40.2 years, respectively, for indoor
and outdoor workers. Again, the difference between the two groups was
not significant.
Table
1. Average ages of indoor and outdoor workers who tested positive and negative
for Lyme disease
(years)
| Test result |
Outdoor |
Indoor |
| Positive
|
42.7 |
46.8 |
| Negative
|
40.2 |
44.2 |
Length of time
worked outdoors or indoors. Among the two groups of workers who tested
positive for Lyme disease, the researchers found no significant differences
in reported time worked outdoors or indoors(table 2).
Table
2. Time worked outdoors or indoors for workers testing positive and negative
for Lyme disease
(months)
| Test result |
Outdoor |
Indoor |
| Positive
|
55.1 |
50.4 |
| Negative
|
35.2 |
46.1 |
The difference in
months worked outdoors between workers testing positive and negative was
significant at p <0.05.
Outdoor hobbies.
Many workers have outdoor hobbies such as bird watching, camping,
fishing, golfing, and hunting in the Long Island region, a factor that
increases risk of exposure to deer ticks and possible Lyme infection (table
3). All 10 of the indoor workers who tested positive reported outdoor
hobbies.
Table
3. Positive Lyme disease test results compared with reported outdoor recreation
Positive test results |
| |
Outdoor workers
(number) |
Indoor workers
(number) |
| Outdoor recreation? |
|
|
| Yes |
23 |
10 |
| No |
10 |
0 |
The data support
the widely held belief that outdoor recreation is a source of exposure
to the deer tick and Lyme disease infection.
The tests show a
significantly higher rate -- 13% -- of positive Lyme disease tests for
construction workers employed outdoors on Long Island. In comparison,
construction workers employed indoors had a prevalence rate of 7%, which
approximates the rate found in the general population on Long Island,
6%. The finding suggests increased risk of infection associated with outdoor
work.
The Role of Time
Employed Outdoors
The length of outdoor
work for those with positive test results was significantly greater than
that for the outdoor workers who tested negative, suggesting outdoor work
as a risk factor.
The Role of Outdoor
Recreation
It is likely that
outdoor recreation has a limited role in exposure potential for Lyme disease.
Although many construction workers reported outdoor hobbies, 10 of the
33 outdoor workers testing positive did not report such activities. Outdoor
hobbies can, in most cases, contribute only about 30% of the exposure
potential for outdoor workers (2 days of recreation as compared with 5
days at work); the exception would be for workers who camp outdoors overnight,
extending the ratio of potential exposure during outdoor recreation to
50% or more.
Even among the indoor
workers with positive test results, it is difficult to imagine that their
reported outdoor hobbies are solely responsible for the exposure. Some
of those grouped with indoor workers may have previously worked outdoors
or may have a second, outdoor job that was not reported to the investigators.
Further, the reported outdoor recreation may have occurred off Long Island
in non-deer-tick areas.
A total of 43 positive
test results were found -- 11 % of the total sample --although only 12
of the 43 reported tick bites. Unless an aggressive search for ticks is
made, many opportunities to prevent infection are missed. We have no estimates
of how many of the 43 individuals will develop chronic Lyme disease but
3 already have and needed prolonged intravenous antibiotic treatment at
a cost of about $15,000 each. This pilot study demonstrates that infection
with Lyme disease is a significant health problem affecting outdoor workers
on Long Island and that a training program for prevention of Lyme disease
should be established, coupled with regular testing. We propose expanding
this preliminary study to attempt to further identify risk factors in
the outdoor population and to develop a training and education program.
- CDC (Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention). 1996. Lyme Disease—United States,
1995. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 45(23): 481-84.
- Doby, J.M., A.
Couatarmanac'h, J. Fages, and S Chevrier. 1989. Les Spirochetoses a
tiques chez professionels de le foret. Enquete serologique chez 653
sujets de 10 departements de l'ouest de la France. (Tick infection among
forestry workers. Follow up of blood results of 653 subjects in 10 areas
of western France.) Archives de Maladie Professional, 50:751-57.
- Fahrer, H., and
others. 1991. The prevalence and incidence of clinical and asymptomatic
Lyme borreliosis in a population at risk. Journal of Infectious Diseases,
163: 305-10.
- Kuiper, H., and
others. 1991. Lyme borreliosis in Dutch forestry workers. Journal
of Infection, 23: 279-86.
- Kuiper, H., and
others. 1993. One Year Follow-Up Study to Assess the Prevalence and
Incidence of Lyme borreliosis among Dutch Forestry Workers. European
Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 12(6):
413-18.
- Long Island Occupational
and Environmental Health Center, Department of Medicine, State University
of New York at Stony Brook. 1990-94. Unpublished data.
- Lyme Disease
Center, Department of Medicine, State University of New York at Stony
Brook. 1989-95. Unpublished data.
- Madal, D., W.
Wunderli, H. Briner, and K. Hansen. 1989. Prevalence of antibodies to
Borrelia burgdorferi in forestry workers and blood donors from the same
region in Switzerland. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology
and Infectious Diseases, 8:992-95.
- Smith, P.F.,
and others. 1988. Occupational risk of Lyme Disease in endemic areas
of New York State. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,
539:289-301.
This paper appears in the eLCOSH website with the permission of the author
and/or copyright holder and may not be reproduced without their consent. eLCOSH is an
information clearinghouse. eLCOSH and its sponsors are not responsible for the accuracy of
information provided on this web site, nor for its use or misuse.
This report was produced as part of a $20,000 grant awarded by CPWR – Center for Construction Research and Training to the Building and Construction Trades Council
of Nassau and Suffolk Counties. The grants program is supported by grant
number UO2/CCU310982 from the National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). The report's contents are solely the responsibility
of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIOSH.
©Copyright 1996, CPWR – Center for Construction Research and Training. All rights reserved. For permission to reproduce
this document or for bulk copies, please write to CPWR, 8484 Georgia Ave,
Suite 1000, Silver Spring, MD 20910. (Report No. OSH3-96)
|