Abstract
Lyme disease, caused by the spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato and transmitted by Ixodes ticks, is a rare condition in Iceland, with only a small number of cases diagnosed annually. This article explores the epidemiology of Lyme disease in Iceland, focusing on the rarity of locally acquired cases and the significant risk of importation from endemic regions. Through a situational analysis and literature review, the study examines the environmental, ecological, and human factors contributing to the current status of Lyme disease in Iceland. The discussion highlights the absence of competent tick vectors and the influence of international travel as the primary source of infection. Recommendations are provided for public health strategies, including enhanced surveillance, traveler education, and climate change monitoring, to mitigate future risks of Lyme disease establishment in Iceland. This comprehensive review aims to inform policymakers and healthcare providers about the unique dynamics of Lyme disease in a non-endemic region.
Introduction
Lyme disease is a tick-borne zoonotic illness caused by the bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, primarily transmitted through the bite of infected Ixodes ticks. Globally, it is one of the most common vector-borne diseases in temperate regions, with significant prevalence in North America and parts of Europe (Steere et al., 2016). The disease manifests through a range of symptoms, from the characteristic erythema migrans rash to severe neurological and cardiac complications if left untreated. While Lyme disease is well-documented in endemic areas, its epidemiology in non-endemic regions like Iceland presents unique challenges and insights.
Iceland, a North Atlantic island nation with a small population and extreme climatic conditions, does not provide a suitable habitat for the sustained survival and reproduction of Ixodes ricinus, the primary vector for Lyme disease in Europe. As a result, locally acquired cases are virtually nonexistent, and diagnosed infections are predominantly linked to travel abroad (Gunnarsson et al., 2019). Despite its rarity, Lyme disease in Iceland warrants attention due to increasing global travel, potential climate change impacts, and the risk of vector establishment in the future. This article aims to analyze the current epidemiology of Lyme disease in Iceland, assess importation risks, and provide actionable recommendations to address emerging threats.
Situational Analysis
The epidemiology of Lyme disease in Iceland reveals a distinct pattern characterized by rarity and external origin. According to studies conducted at Landspítali University Hospital, an average of 6 to 7 cases are diagnosed annually, with an incidence rate of approximately 2 per 100,000 persons per year (Gunnarsson et al., 2019). Notably, during the period from 2011 to 2015, all confirmed cases were traced to infections acquired outside Iceland, predominantly from endemic areas in Europe and North America. The most common clinical presentation among these patients was erythema migrans (97%), with rare instances of neuroborreliosis (3%) (Gunnarsson et al., 2019).
Iceland’s unique geographical and climatic conditions play a significant role in limiting the risk of local transmission. The country’s subarctic climate, characterized by cold winters and short summers, does not support the lifecycle of Ixodes ricinus, which requires specific temperature and humidity thresholds to thrive. Additionally, the absence of large mammal hosts, such as deer, which are critical for the tick’s reproductive cycle, further reduces the likelihood of vector establishment. While migratory birds may occasionally introduce ticks to Iceland, these vectors rarely survive long enough to pose a significant threat (Richter et al., 2013).
Human behavior, particularly international travel, remains the primary driver of Lyme disease incidence in Iceland. With tourism and outbound travel increasing over the past decades, Icelanders are frequently exposed to endemic regions. Data from the Icelandic Tourism Board indicate that over 2 million tourists visited Iceland in 2019, while thousands of residents traveled to Europe and North America annually, heightening the risk of imported cases. Furthermore, diagnostic challenges persist due to the rarity of the disease in Iceland, potentially leading to underreporting or delayed treatment among returning travelers.
Climate change introduces an additional layer of complexity to the situational analysis. Rising global temperatures could, in theory, create more favorable conditions for tick survival in northern regions, including Iceland. Although current evidence suggests that Iceland’s climate remains inhospitable to Ixodes ricinus, ongoing environmental changes necessitate vigilance to detect any shifts in vector distribution (Ogden et al., 2021). The interplay of these factors—rarity of local cases, reliance on importation, and potential climate impacts—forms the basis for understanding Lyme disease dynamics in Iceland.
Literature Review
Lyme disease research globally has focused extensively on epidemiology, vector biology, and clinical management in endemic regions. However, studies specific to non-endemic areas like Iceland are limited, reflecting the low incidence and unique challenges of such settings. This literature review synthesizes key findings relevant to Lyme disease in Iceland, drawing from both local epidemiological data and broader international research on importation risks and vector dynamics.
Epidemiological studies in Iceland consistently highlight the rarity of Lyme disease and its external origin. Gunnarsson et al. (2019) conducted a retrospective analysis of cases diagnosed at Landspítali University Hospital from 2011 to 2015, identifying 33 confirmed cases, all linked to travel abroad. The study emphasized that erythema migrans was the predominant clinical feature, underscoring the importance of early recognition among returning travelers. Earlier case reports, such as one documented in 1999, also describe imported infections, with no evidence of autochthonous transmission despite extensive serological testing (Sigurdsson & Gudjonsson, 1999).
The absence of a competent vector population in Iceland is a well-documented barrier to local transmission. Ixodes ricinus, the primary European vector for Borrelia burgdorferi, requires specific ecological conditions, including mild temperatures and high humidity, which are not consistently present in Iceland (Estrada-Peña et al., 2018). Research on tick ecology suggests that while migratory birds may transport ticks to Iceland, the harsh climate and lack of suitable hosts prevent establishment (Richter et al., 2013). Comparative studies in other northern regions, such as Greenland, similarly report no sustained tick populations, reinforcing the notion that subarctic environments are currently unsuitable for Ixodes ticks.
Importation risks associated with travel are a critical focus of Lyme disease literature in non-endemic regions. Studies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate that international travel significantly contributes to the spread of vector-borne diseases, including Lyme disease, in areas with low local risk (CDC, 2023). In Iceland, the high volume of outbound travel to endemic areas, coupled with limited awareness among travelers and healthcare providers, exacerbates the risk of imported cases going undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Research also suggests that returning travelers may not always associate nonspecific symptoms, such as fatigue or joint pain, with Lyme disease, leading to delays in seeking care (Steere et al., 2016).
Climate change emerges as a recurring theme in recent literature, with potential implications for Lyme disease distribution. Ogden et al. (2021) project that warming temperatures could expand the range of Ixodes ricinus into northern latitudes over the coming decades, although Iceland’s extreme weather patterns may mitigate this trend. Studies in Scandinavia demonstrate increasing tick activity at higher latitudes, raising concerns about the future risk of vector establishment in previously unaffected areas (Jaenson et al., 2012). While Iceland-specific models are unavailable, these findings underscore the need for proactive surveillance to detect ecological shifts.
Diagnostic and public health challenges in non-endemic regions are also addressed in the literature. Serological testing for Lyme disease, while widely used, can yield false positives or negatives, particularly in low-prevalence settings like Iceland (Marques, 2015). Moreover, limited physician familiarity with Lyme disease in Iceland may contribute to underreporting, a phenomenon observed in other non-endemic regions (CDC, 2023). Public health strategies targeting traveler education and post-travel screening have been proposed as effective measures to mitigate importation risks, though implementation remains inconsistent (Steere et al., 2016).
In summary, the literature confirms that Lyme disease in Iceland is a rare, imported condition with no evidence of local transmission. However, gaps remain in understanding long-term importation trends, diagnostic accuracy, and the potential impact of climate change on vector dynamics. Future research must address these areas to ensure effective prevention and control in Iceland.
Discussion
The epidemiology of Lyme disease in Iceland presents a unique case study in the context of global vector-borne disease dynamics. The near-complete absence of locally acquired cases, as documented by Gunnarsson et al. (2019), reflects both environmental constraints and the island’s isolation from endemic regions. This discussion explores the factors contributing to the rarity of Lyme disease in Iceland, the mechanisms of importation, and the potential future risks associated with changing global conditions.
The primary reason for the low incidence of Lyme disease in Iceland is the inhospitable environment for Ixodes ricinus ticks. The subarctic climate, with prolonged winters and limited periods of warmth, disrupts the tick’s lifecycle, preventing sustained populations from establishing. Unlike neighboring Scandinavian countries, where rising temperatures have facilitated tick expansion into higher latitudes (Jaenson et al., 2012), Iceland’s weather patterns remain a significant barrier. Furthermore, the scarcity of suitable mammalian hosts, particularly deer, limits the ability of any introduced ticks to complete their reproductive cycle. While migratory birds may occasionally carry ticks to Iceland, these vectors are unlikely to survive or transmit Borrelia burgdorferi locally (Richter et al., 2013). This ecological reality underscores Iceland’s status as a non-endemic region, at least under current conditions.
Importation through international travel is the dominant pathway for Lyme disease cases in Iceland. All documented cases between 2011 and 2015 were acquired abroad, highlighting the critical role of human mobility in disease spread (Gunnarsson et al., 2019). Icelanders frequently travel to endemic areas in Europe and North America, where exposure to infected ticks is a known risk. Similarly, the influx of tourists from these regions raises the possibility of undiagnosed cases being introduced, though the lack of local vectors minimizes onward transmission. The predominance of erythema migrans in diagnosed cases suggests that early-stage infections are being identified, but the potential for late-stage complications, such as neuroborreliosis or Lyme arthritis, remains a concern if initial diagnoses are missed. This situation is compounded by limited awareness among both travelers and healthcare providers in Iceland, where Lyme disease is not a routine consideration in differential diagnoses.
Diagnostic challenges further complicate the management of Lyme disease in Iceland. Serological testing, which relies on antibody detection, can be inconclusive, especially in early infection stages or in low-prevalence settings (Marques, 2015). False positives are a particular concern, as they may lead to unnecessary treatment, while false negatives can delay care. Additionally, the rarity of Lyme disease in Iceland means that physicians may not immediately consider it as a potential diagnosis, particularly for patients presenting with nonspecific symptoms months after travel. This diagnostic uncertainty aligns with broader challenges observed in non-endemic regions, where clinical suspicion and testing accuracy are often suboptimal (Steere et al., 2016).
Looking forward, climate change poses a theoretical but noteworthy risk to Lyme disease epidemiology in Iceland. Global warming is expanding the geographical range of Ixodes ricinus in northern Europe, with increased tick activity reported in Scandinavia and even parts of the Arctic Circle (Ogden et al., 2021). While Iceland’s climate remains too harsh for sustained tick populations, incremental warming could, over decades, create marginally more favorable conditions, particularly in coastal areas with milder temperatures. Such a scenario is speculative at present, but it warrants ongoing monitoring, especially given the role of climate in shaping vector-borne disease distributions elsewhere. Additionally, changes in migratory bird patterns or the introduction of new host species could alter the ecological landscape, though these factors are less predictable.
Public health implications of Lyme disease in Iceland center on prevention rather than treatment of local cases. Current data suggest that the disease burden is manageable, with a small number of imported cases annually (Gunnarsson et al., 2019). However, the potential for underdiagnosis and the long-term consequences of untreated Lyme disease necessitate proactive measures. Traveler education is paramount, as many individuals may not be aware of tick bite prevention strategies or the need to seek medical attention after visiting endemic areas. Similarly, enhancing physician training on Lyme disease recognition and diagnosis could reduce diagnostic delays. Finally, surveillance systems must be strengthened to track imported cases and detect any early signs of vector establishment, ensuring that Iceland remains prepared for emerging risks.
Recommendations
Addressing Lyme disease in Iceland requires a multifaceted public health approach that prioritizes prevention, surveillance, and education. The following recommendations are tailored to the country’s unique epidemiological profile as a non-endemic region with reliance on imported cases:
- Traveler Education and Awareness Campaigns: Public health authorities should develop and disseminate educational materials targeting Icelanders traveling to endemic areas. These materials should cover tick bite prevention (e.g., wearing protective clothing, using repellents), self-inspection for ticks after outdoor activities, and the importance of seeking medical care for symptoms like rashes or fever post-travel. Partnerships with travel agencies and airlines could facilitate the distribution of this information.
- Physician Training and Diagnostic Support: Medical training programs should include modules on Lyme disease recognition, emphasizing its potential among returning travelers. Additionally, diagnostic guidelines specific to low-prevalence settings should be developed, incorporating clinical history and travel exposure alongside serologic testing to minimize misdiagnosis. Telemedicine or collaboration with international Lyme disease experts could provide further support for complex cases.
- Enhanced Surveillance Systems: A national registry for Lyme disease cases should be established to track incidence, origin of infection, and clinical outcomes. This registry would improve understanding of importation trends and identify high-risk travel destinations. Surveillance should also extend to environmental monitoring, with periodic assessments of tick presence in Iceland, particularly in warmer coastal regions or areas frequented by migratory birds.
- Climate Change Monitoring: Given the potential for climate change to alter vector distributions, long-term studies should be initiated to model the impact of rising temperatures on tick survival in Iceland. Collaboration with regional climate and vector ecology researchers (e.g., in Scandinavia) could provide insights into potential risks, ensuring early detection of ecological shifts.
- Public Health Policy Development: Policies should be enacted to mandate post-travel health screenings for individuals returning from endemic areas, particularly those reporting symptoms consistent with Lyme disease. Additionally, funding should be allocated for research into the feasibility of rapid diagnostic tools tailored to non-endemic settings, improving case detection and management.
Implementing these recommendations would position Iceland to maintain its low Lyme disease incidence while addressing the risks associated with importation and future environmental changes. A proactive stance is essential to protect public health in this unique non-endemic context.
Conclusion
Lyme disease in Iceland represents a rare but noteworthy public health concern, shaped by the island’s subarctic environment and reliance on imported cases. Current epidemiological data confirm that all diagnosed infections originate abroad, with no evidence of local transmission due to the absence of competent tick vectors and suitable host populations (Gunnarsson et al., 2019). International travel remains the primary driver of incidence, exposing Icelanders to risks in endemic regions while underscoring the need for enhanced awareness and diagnostic capacity. Looking ahead, climate change introduces a speculative but plausible risk of vector establishment over the long term, necessitating vigilance and proactive monitoring.
This article has provided a comprehensive overview of Lyme disease in Iceland, from situational analysis to actionable recommendations. By prioritizing traveler education, physician training, surveillance, and climate monitoring, Iceland can effectively manage the current low burden of disease and prepare for potential future challenges. As global travel and environmental conditions continue to evolve, ongoing research and public health efforts will be critical to safeguarding the population from Lyme disease and other emerging vector-borne threats. Iceland’s experience offers valuable lessons for other non-endemic regions, highlighting the importance of tailored strategies to address importation risks in unique ecological and social contexts.
References
- CDC. (2023). Lyme Disease Surveillance and Data. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/lyme/data-research/facts-stats/index.html
- Estrada-Peña, A., Cutler, S. J., Potkonjak, A., Vassier-Tussaut, M., Van Bortel, W., Zeller, H., … & Mihalca, A. D. (2018). An updated meta-analysis of the distribution and prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. in ticks in Europe. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife, 7(3), 408-417. doi:10.1016/j.ijppaw.2018.09.008
- Gunnarsson, K., Einarsdóttir, E. D., Ólafsdóttir, E. S., & Gottfreðsson, M. (2019). Lyme disease in Iceland – Epidemiology from 2011 to 2015. Læknablaðið, 105(2), 63-68. doi:10.17992/lbl.2019.02.213
- Jaenson, T. G., Jaenson, D. G., Eisen, L., Petersson, E., & Lindgren, E. (2012). Changes in the geographical distribution and abundance of the tick Ixodes ricinus during the past 30 years in Sweden. Parasites & Vectors, 5, 8. doi:10.1186/1756-3305-5-8
- Marques, A. R. (2015). Laboratory diagnosis of Lyme disease: Advances and challenges. Infectious Disease Clinics of North America, 29(2), 295-307. doi:10.1016/j.idc.2015.02.005
- Ogden, N. H., Bouchard, C., Badcock, J., Drebot, M. A., Elias, S. P., Hatchette, T. F., … & Lindsay, L. R. (2021). What is the real number of Lyme disease cases in Canada? BMC Public Health, 21, 849. doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10872-9
- Richter, D., Matuschka, F. R., Spielman, A., & Mahadevan, L. (2013). How ticks get under your skin: Insertion mechanics of the feeding apparatus of Ixodes ricinus ticks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1773), 20131758. doi:10.1098/rspb.2013.1758
- Sigurdsson, A. F., & Gudjonsson, H. (1999). Icelandic boy with Lyme disease: A case report and discussion. Læknablaðið, 85(5), 401-405.
- Steere, A. C., Strle, F., Wormser, G. P., Hu, L. T., Branda, J. A., Hovius, J. W., … & Mead, P. S. (2016). Lyme borreliosis. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 2, 16090. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.90
