RESEARCH PAPER
Protective efficacy of permethrin-treated trousers against tick infestation in forestry workers
 
More details
Hide details
1
Institute of Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Bernd Roßbach   

Institute of Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2014;21(4):712–717
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Introduction and objective:
Prevention of tick borne diseases in forestry workers is essentially based on the use of appropriate clothing. The objective of this pragmatic, randomized, controlled trial was to assess the potential benefit of permethrin-treated working trousers for the prevention of tick infestation during forestry work.

Material and Methods:
N=164 male forestry workers were equipped for a period of 16 weeks with permethrin-treated (intervention group – I) or untreated work trousers (control group – II). Subgroups, according to the use of trousers with (I-1, II-1) or without cut protection lining (I-2, II-2) were constituted. Tick infestation (quantity of ticks on the body surface) was assessed by questionnaire after 16 workdays. Control and intervention groups were compared by calculating the infestation rate (percentage of subjects with ticks) and the average number of ticks per workday.

Results:
The infestation rate in the intervention group was significantly lower than in the control group (36.6 vs. 63.4%, p=0.001; Fisher-test). Further analysis revealed a significant reduction of tick infestation by permethrin treatment only for subjects wearing trousers without the cut protection lining (I-2: 34.2 vs. II-2: 80.0%, p<0.001), while users of cut protection trousers did not benefit from such treated trousers (I-1: 38.6 vs. II-1: 47.6%, n.s.). Similar results were found for comparisons based on the average number of ticks per workday.

Conclusions:
The use of permethrin-treated trousers does not completely prevent tick infestations. Improvement of tick protection has been shown only for some applications, but not in general. Additional prevention measures are therefore still indispensable.

 
REFERENCES (26)
1.
Oehme R, Hartelt K, Backe H, Brockmann S, Kimmig P. Foci of tickborne diseases in southwest Germany. Int J Med Microbiol. 2002; 291(Suppl 33): 22–29.
 
2.
Cisak E, Sroka J, Zwoliński J, Umiński J. Seroepidemiologic study on tick-borne encephalitis among forestry workers and farmers from the Lublin region (eastern Poland). Ann Agric Environ Med. 1998; 5(2): 177–181.
 
3.
Chmielewska-Badora J, Moniuszko A, Żukiewicz-Sobczak W, Zwoliński J, Piątek J, Pancewicz S. Serological survey in persons occupationally exposed to tick-borne pathogens in cases of co-infections with Borrelia burgdorferi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Bartonella spp. and Babesia microti. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2012; 19(2): 271–274.
 
4.
Cisak E, Zając V, Wójcik-Fatla A, Dutkiewicz J. Risk of tick-borne diseases in various categories of employment among forestry workers in eastern Poland. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2012; 19(3): 469–474.
 
5.
Stanek G, Wormser GP, Gray J, Strle F. Lyme borreliosis. The Lancet 2012; 379(9814): 461–473.
 
6.
Committee for Biological Agents (ABAS). TRBA 230 “Protective Measures for Activities Involving Biological Agents in Agriculture and Forestry and Comparable Activities”. 2008; http://www.baua. de/en/Topics-from-A-to-Z/Biological-Agents/TRBA/pdf/TRBA-230. pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (access: 2014.02.24).
 
7.
Vázquez M, Muehlenbein C, Cartter M, Hayes EB, Ertel S, Shapiro ED. Effectiveness of Personal Protective Measures to Prevent Lyme Disease. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008; 14(2): 210–216.
 
8.
Hayes EB, Piesman J. How Can We Prevent Lyme Disease? N Engl J Med. 2003; 348(24): 2424–2430.
 
9.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Workplace Safety and Health Topics/ Diseases & Injuries: Tickborne Diseases. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topic... (access: 2014.02.24).
 
10.
Bhate C, Schwartz RA. Lyme disease: Part II. Management and prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011; 64(4): 639–653.
 
11.
Mount GA, Snoddy EL. Pressurized sprays of permethrin and deet on clothing for personal protection against the lone star tick and the American dog tick (Acari: Ixodidae). J Econ Entomol. 1983; 76(3): 529–531.
 
12.
Schreck CE, Mount GA, Carlson DA. Pressurized sprays of permethrin on clothing for personal protection against the lone star tick (Acari: Ixodidae). J Econ Entomol. 1982; 75(6): 1059–1061.
 
13.
Evans SR, Korch GW, Lawson MA. Comparative field evaluation of permethrin and deet-treated military uniforms for personal protection against ticks (Acari). J Med Entomol. 1990; 27(5): 829–834.
 
14.
Schreck CE, Snoddy EL, Spielman A. Pressurized sprays of permethrin or deet on military clothing for personal protection against Ixodes dammini (Acari: Ixodidae). J Med Entomol. 1986; 23(4): 396–399.
 
15.
Schreck CE, Mount GA, Carlson DA. Wear and wash persistence of permethrin used as a clothing treatment for personal protection against the lone star tick (Acari: Ixodidae). J Med Entomol. 1982; 19(2): 143–146.
 
16.
Lane RS. Treatment of clothing with a permethrin spray for personal protection against the western black-legged tick, Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae). Exp Appl Acarol. 1989; 6(4): 343–352.
 
17.
Faulde MK, Uedelhoven WM, Robbins RG. Contact toxicity and residual activity of different permethrin-based fabric impregnation methods for Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae), Ixodes ricinus (Acari: Ixodidae), and Lepisma saccharina (Thysanura: Lepismatidae). J Med Entomol. 2003; 40(6): 935–941.
 
18.
Faulde M, Uedelhoven W. A new clothing impregnation method for personal protection against ticks and biting insects. Int J Med Microbiol. 2006; 296(Suppl 40): 225–229.
 
19.
Faulde MK, Uedelhoven WM, Malerius M, Robbins RG. Factory-based permethrin impregnation of uniforms: residual activity against Aedes aegypti and Ixodes ricinus in battle dress uniforms worn under field conditions, and cross-contamination during the laundering and storage process. Mil Med. 2006; 171(6): 472–477.
 
20.
Appel KE, Gundert-Remy U, Fischer H, Faulde M, Mross KG, Letzel S, Rossbach B. Risk assessment of Bundeswehr (German Federal Armed Forces) permethrin-impregnated battle dress uniforms (BDU). Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2008; 211(1–2): 88–104.
 
21.
Rossbach B, Appel KE, Mross KG, Letzel S. Uptake of permethrin from impregnated clothing. Toxicol Lett. 2010; 192(1): 50–55.
 
22.
Rusiecki JA, Patel R, Koutros S, Beane-Freeman L, Landgren O, Bonner MR, et al. Cancer incidence among pesticide applicators exposed to permethrin in the Agricultural Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2009; 117(4): 581–586.
 
23.
US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Office of Pesticide Programs. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Permethrin – Revised May 2009.
 
24.
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/RE... (access: 2014.02.24).
 
25.
Faulde M, Scharninghausen J, Tisch M. Preventive effect of permethrinimpregnated clothing to Ixodes ricinus ticks and associated Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. in Germany. Int J Med Microbiol. 2008; 298: 321–324.
 
26.
Vaughn MF, Meshnick SR. Pilot study assessing the effectiveness of long-lasting permethrin-impregnated clothing for the prevention of tick bites. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2011; 11(7): 869–875.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966