OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to investigate patterns of cohabitation with farm animals in urban households in Vientiane, Lao People's Democratic Republic, with regard to animal-to-human disease transmission. We also investigated the association between participation in hygiene-related educational activities and good hygiene practices in households with or without cohabitation with animals. METHODS: A survey regarding cohabitation with animals, socioeconomic characteristics and participation in educational activities was conducted among 1,497 households randomly sampled from urban districts of Vientiane in 2001. Rates of satisfactory performance of recommended good hygiene practices according to a program commencing in 1996 were compared among households cohabiting with animals with or without participation in educational activities (reference group). RESULTS: Even among households not engaged in agriculture as a major source of income, 54.4, 34.9, 7.9, 3.1 and 35.7% cohabited with chickens, ducks, cattle, buffaloes and dogs, respectively. The percentage of households fulfilling the recommendations for good hygiene practices was 56.7%. The rates of satisfactory hygiene practices among households participating in health education and cohabitating with chickens, ducks or cattle were greater than those in the reference group (OR = 1.7, 95%CI = 1.2, 2.3; OR = 2.0, 95%CI = 1.3, 3.0; OR = 2.3, 95%CI = 1.0, 4.9) regardless of socioeconomic factors. Households cohabiting with animals showed poorer rates of satisfactory hygiene practices than those without animals. CONCLUSIONS: Cohabitation with farm animals is common in urban Vientiane regardless of household involvement in agriculture. Further effort is required to improve hygiene conditions, despite some positive effects of health education even in households cohabiting with animals.
OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to investigate patterns of cohabitation with farm animals in urban households in Vientiane, LaoPeople's Democratic Republic, with regard to animal-to-human disease transmission. We also investigated the association between participation in hygiene-related educational activities and good hygiene practices in households with or without cohabitation with animals. METHODS: A survey regarding cohabitation with animals, socioeconomic characteristics and participation in educational activities was conducted among 1,497 households randomly sampled from urban districts of Vientiane in 2001. Rates of satisfactory performance of recommended good hygiene practices according to a program commencing in 1996 were compared among households cohabiting with animals with or without participation in educational activities (reference group). RESULTS: Even among households not engaged in agriculture as a major source of income, 54.4, 34.9, 7.9, 3.1 and 35.7% cohabited with chickens, ducks, cattle, buffaloes and dogs, respectively. The percentage of households fulfilling the recommendations for good hygiene practices was 56.7%. The rates of satisfactory hygiene practices among households participating in health education and cohabitating with chickens, ducks or cattle were greater than those in the reference group (OR = 1.7, 95%CI = 1.2, 2.3; OR = 2.0, 95%CI = 1.3, 3.0; OR = 2.3, 95%CI = 1.0, 4.9) regardless of socioeconomic factors. Households cohabiting with animals showed poorer rates of satisfactory hygiene practices than those without animals. CONCLUSIONS: Cohabitation with farm animals is common in urban Vientiane regardless of household involvement in agriculture. Further effort is required to improve hygiene conditions, despite some positive effects of health education even in households cohabiting with animals.
Authors: Jeroen H J Ensink; Wim van der Hoek; M Mukhtar; Zarfishan Tahir; Felix P Amerasinghe Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.184
Authors: Tinh Hien Tran; Thanh Liem Nguyen; Thi Dung Nguyen; Thi San Luong; Phuong Mai Pham; van Vinh Chau Nguyen; Thi Suu Pham; Cong Dong Vo; Thi Quynh Mai Le; Thi Thi Ngo; Bach Khoa Dao; Phuc Phat Le; Thanh Truong Nguyen; Thuy Long Hoang; Viet Tung Cao; Truong Giang Le; Dac Tho Nguyen; Hong Nga Le; Kim Tien Nguyen; Hoang San Le; Van Tuan Le; Dolecek Christiane; Tan Thanh Tran; de Jong Menno; Constance Schultsz; Peter Cheng; Wilina Lim; Peter Horby; Jeremy Farrar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-02-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christopher Lowenstein; William F Waters; Amira Roess; Jessica H Leibler; Jay P Graham Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2016-10-10 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Jesse S Ayivor; Fidelia Ohemeng; Elaine Tweneboah Lawson; Linda Waldman; Melissa Leach; Yaa Ntiamoa-Baidu Journal: J Environ Public Health Date: 2017-09-10
Authors: Hannah R Holt; Phouth Inthavong; Boualam Khamlome; Kate Blaszak; Chattouphone Keokamphe; Virasack Somoulay; Anousone Phongmany; Peter A Durr; Kerryne Graham; John Allen; Blánaid Donnelly; Stuart D Blacksell; Fred Unger; Delia Grace; Silvia Alonso; Jeff Gilbert Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2016-04-12