# Seroprevalence and Associated Factors of Camel and Human Brucellosis in Dire District, Southern Ethiopia: A One‐Health Perspective

## TL;DR

This study in Ethiopia found that both camels and humans in the Dire district have brucellosis, with risk factors like raw milk consumption and large camel herds.

## Contribution

The study provides new evidence on cross-species brucellosis transmission in a pastoralist region of Ethiopia.

## Key findings

- Camel brucellosis prevalence was 4.36%, with adult, female camels and large herds as risk factors.
- Human brucellosis prevalence was 3.08%, linked to household Brucella-positive camels and raw milk consumption.
- Shared exposure at the human-animal interface highlights the need for zoonotic disease awareness in pastoral communities.

## Abstract

The public health and economic impact of brucellosis remain a significant concern in Ethiopia. The high seroprevalence rates observed in both camels and humans indicate the potential for cross‐species transmission, highlighting the risk of brucellosis spreading. However, there is limited evidence concerning the relationship between brucellosis prevalence in humans and camels in the pastoralist regions of Ethiopia.

A cross‐sectional study was conducted among 390 camels and 390 camel farmers in the Dire district from November 2023 to March 2024, using multistage sampling. This study aimed to determine the seroprevalence of brucellosis in camel farmers and their camels. During screening and confirming the presence of brucellosis, a modified rose Bengal plate test (MRBPT) and an indirect enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (I‐ELISA) were used, respectively, as a test series.

Among 390 camels, 7.17%, 95% CI (4.99–10.22) and 4.36%, 95% CI (2.72–6.91) were seropositive for Brucella using MRPT and I‐ELISA, respectively. Among 390 camel farmers, Brucella seroprevalence was 7.69% (95% CI: 5.42–10.81) by MRBPT and 3.08% (95% CI: 1.75–5.35) by I‐ELISA. In camels, adult (OR: 5.59, 95% CI: 1.67–44.48), female (OR: 2.83, 95% CI: 1.54–12.81) and large herds (OR: 5.10, 95% CI: 1.27–20.49) were statistically significant risk factors for the seroprevalence of camel brucellosis. In humans, the presence of a positive animal in the household (OR: 5.07, 95% CI: 1.10–23.34) and camel farmers who consume raw milk (OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.51–5.21) were also statistically significant risk factors for the seroprevalence of brucellosis.

The presence of a Brucella‐positive camel in households and the consumption of raw milk highlight shared exposure at the human–animal interface. In marginal areas of Ethiopia, such as the Dire district, camel herders often face challenges accessing public services and information regarding zoonotic diseases. Consequently, promoting preventive strategies and raising awareness about the public health effects of camel brucellosis are encouraged to decrease the impact of this zoonotic disease in pastoral communities.

The prevalence of camel brucellosis was 4.36%. Being adult, female and large herds were significant risk factors for camel brucellosis. The prevalence of human brucellosis was 3.08%. The presence of a positive animal in the household and camel farmers who consume raw milk were significant factors for human brucellosis.