Sex- and Age-Specific Lyme Disease Testing Patterns in the United States, 2019 and 2022.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Yonghong Li, Fumika Matsushita, Zhen Chen, Robert S Jones, Lance A Bare, Jeannine M Petersen, Alison F Hinckley
{"title":"Sex- and Age-Specific Lyme Disease Testing Patterns in the United States, 2019 and 2022.","authors":"Yonghong Li, Fumika Matsushita, Zhen Chen, Robert S Jones, Lance A Bare, Jeannine M Petersen, Alison F Hinckley","doi":"10.1177/00333549251314419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Serologic testing is a useful adjunct for the diagnosis of Lyme disease, a major public health problem in certain US regions. We aimed to determine whether Lyme disease serologic testing and results differed by sex and age group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified 2 cohorts of individuals across all ages who underwent serologic testing for Lyme disease at a national reference laboratory in 2019 (cohort 1) and 2022 (cohort 2). If an individual had multiple tests in the same year, we included only the first test. We excluded individuals who had been tested in the previous 5 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cohorts 1 and 2 consisted of 578 052 and 550 674 people, respectively. Fewer males than females were tested in cohort 1 (42.7% vs 57.3%) and cohort 2 (42.3% vs 57.7%), although similar numbers were tested for both sexes among nonadults. More males than females had a positive test result in cohort 1 (53.9% more males) and cohort 2 (52.9% more males). The odds ratio of receiving a positive test result among males versus females was 2.09 (95% CI, 2.01-2.17) in cohort 1 and 2.12 (95% CI, 2.05-2.19) in cohort 2. Among people with positive test results, females (except children) were more likely than males to have positive immunoglobulin M and negative immunoglobulin G results, which can serve as a marker of early infection (odds ratio = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.31-1.55] in cohort 1 and 1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47] in cohort 2).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Further studies are needed to understand whether the observed differences in Lyme disease testing and positivity result from sex- and age-associated disparities in social behavior, health care seeking, clinical practice, or other factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":20793,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Reports","volume":" ","pages":"333549251314419"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962936/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549251314419","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Serologic testing is a useful adjunct for the diagnosis of Lyme disease, a major public health problem in certain US regions. We aimed to determine whether Lyme disease serologic testing and results differed by sex and age group.

Methods: We identified 2 cohorts of individuals across all ages who underwent serologic testing for Lyme disease at a national reference laboratory in 2019 (cohort 1) and 2022 (cohort 2). If an individual had multiple tests in the same year, we included only the first test. We excluded individuals who had been tested in the previous 5 years.

Results: Cohorts 1 and 2 consisted of 578 052 and 550 674 people, respectively. Fewer males than females were tested in cohort 1 (42.7% vs 57.3%) and cohort 2 (42.3% vs 57.7%), although similar numbers were tested for both sexes among nonadults. More males than females had a positive test result in cohort 1 (53.9% more males) and cohort 2 (52.9% more males). The odds ratio of receiving a positive test result among males versus females was 2.09 (95% CI, 2.01-2.17) in cohort 1 and 2.12 (95% CI, 2.05-2.19) in cohort 2. Among people with positive test results, females (except children) were more likely than males to have positive immunoglobulin M and negative immunoglobulin G results, which can serve as a marker of early infection (odds ratio = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.31-1.55] in cohort 1 and 1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47] in cohort 2).

Conclusions: Further studies are needed to understand whether the observed differences in Lyme disease testing and positivity result from sex- and age-associated disparities in social behavior, health care seeking, clinical practice, or other factors.

2019年和2022年美国性别和年龄特异性莱姆病检测模式
目的:血清学检测是诊断莱姆病的有用辅助手段,莱姆病是美国某些地区的主要公共卫生问题。我们的目的是确定莱姆病血清学检测和结果是否因性别和年龄组而异。方法:我们确定了2019年(队列1)和2022年(队列2)在国家参考实验室进行莱姆病血清学检测的两组不同年龄段的个体。如果一个个体在同一年进行了多次检测,我们只纳入第一次检测。我们排除了在过去5年内接受过检测的个体。结果:第1组和第2组分别有578 052人和550 674人。在队列1(42.7%对57.3%)和队列2(42.3%对57.7%)中,接受检测的男性比女性少,尽管在非成年人群中,两性接受检测的人数相似。队列1(男性多53.9%)和队列2(男性多52.9%)阳性检测结果男性多于女性。在队列1中,男性与女性获得阳性检测结果的比值比为2.09 (95% CI, 2.01-2.17),在队列2中为2.12 (95% CI, 2.05-2.19)。在检测结果阳性的人群中,女性(儿童除外)免疫球蛋白M阳性和免疫球蛋白G阴性的可能性高于男性,可作为早期感染的标志(队列1的比值比为1.43 [95% CI, 1.31-1.55],队列2的比值比为1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47])。需要进一步的研究来了解观察到的莱姆病检测和阳性的差异是否源于社会行为、医疗保健寻求、临床实践或其他因素中与性别和年龄相关的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health Reports
Public Health Reports 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
164
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Reports is the official journal of the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General and the U.S. Public Health Service and has been published since 1878. It is published bimonthly, plus supplement issues, through an official agreement with the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes original research and commentaries in the areas of public health practice and methodology, original research, public health law, and public health schools and teaching. Issues contain regular commentaries by the U.S. Surgeon General and executives of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health. The journal focuses upon such topics as tobacco control, teenage violence, occupational disease and injury, immunization, drug policy, lead screening, health disparities, and many other key and emerging public health issues. In addition to the six regular issues, PHR produces supplemental issues approximately 2-5 times per year which focus on specific topics that are of particular interest to our readership. The journal''s contributors are on the front line of public health and they present their work in a readable and accessible format.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信