Key result
Being a stray cat was significantly associated with a higher seroprevalence of Feline calicivirus compared to domestic cats (45.08% vs 32.85%; OR 1.678, 95% CI 1.362-2.066, P<0.001).
Cross-Sectional (n=1,584)
Odds Ratio: 1.678 (95% CI 1.362–2.066)
Absolute Event Rate: 45.08% vs 32.85%
p-value: p=<0.001
This study provides the first report of FCV infection in stray cats in China, demonstrating a high seroprevalence and identifying species as a significant risk factor.
May heighten FCV vigilance for strays in shelters; leaves open causal factors and intervention trials.
To improve our understanding of Feline calicivirus (FCV) infection in cats in Northeast China, 1584 serum samples from 974 domestic cats and 610 stray cats were collected between 2012 and 2015. The samples were tested for FCV antibodies using a commercially available ELISA kit. The results revealed an overall seroprevalence of 37.56% (595/1584), a seroprevalence in domestic cats of 32.85% (320/974) and a seroprevalence in stray cats of 45.08% (275/610). Risk factor analysis indicated that species was the only risk factor for the presence of FCV (OR=1.678, 95% CI=1.362-2.066, P<0.001); age, season, region and gender were not risk factors. This is the first report of FCV infection in stray cats in China, and the results of this study can aid in FCV infection control in the felidae family.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Feline calicivirus (FCV) infection (n=1,584). Stray cat status vs. Domestic cats was evaluated on Presence of FCV antibodies (seroprevalence) (OR 1.678, 95% CI 1.362-2.066, p=<0.001). Being a stray cat was significantly associated with a higher seroprevalence of Feline calicivirus compared to domestic cats (45.08% vs 32.85%; OR 1.678, 95% CI 1.362-2.066, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: