| Literature DB >> 24984769 |
Cédric B Chesnais1, François Missamou, Sébastien D Pion, Jean Bopda, Frédéric Louya, Andrew C Majewski, Peter U Fischer, Gary J Weil, Michel Boussinesq.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding risk factors for lymphatic filariasis (LF) in Central Africa. We studied the epidemiology of LF in an endemic village in the Republic of Congo.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24984769 PMCID: PMC4089930 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-7-300
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Study area. Red star indicates location of Séké Pembé.
prevalence and intensity of infection in Séké Pembé
| | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | |||||||||||||||
| 5-10 | 203 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 111.5 | 111.5$ | 94 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 111.5 | 111.5$ | 109 | 0.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 11-15 | 110 | 12.7 | 8.2 | 24.8 | 22.0 (9.5-89.0) | 52 | 15.4 | 11.5 | 20.0 | 17.0 (9.5-52.0) | 58 | 10.3 | 5.2 | 37.9 | 33.0 (18.5-89.0) |
| 16-20 | 57 | 35.1 | 10.5 | 3.8 | 3.0 (1.0-24.0) | 32 | 43.8 | 15.6 | 5.0 | 4.5 (1.5-24.0) | 25 | 24.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 1.0$ |
| 21-30 | 113 | 25.7 | 5.3 | 13.5 | 16.3 (1.0-42.5) | 45 | 33.3 | 8.9 | 19.6 | 16.3 (13.5-42.5) | 68 | 20.6 | 2.9 | 6.5 | 21.5 (1.0-42.0) |
| 31-40 | 107 | 25.2 | 5.6 | 6.7 | 9.8 (0.5-189.5) | 54 | 33.3 | 11.1 | 6.7 | 9.8 (0.5-189.5) | 53 | 17.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 41-50 | 96 | 25.0 | 7.3 | 25.3 | 23.0 (7.5-230.0) | 43 | 32.6 | 11.6 | 29.4 | 28.5 (7.5-230.0) | 53 | 18.9 | 3.8 | 17.3 | 18.0 (13.0-23.0) |
| >50 | 88 | 19.3 | 6.8 | 16.4 | 18.0 (0.5-203.0) | 34 | 29.4 | 8.8 | 8.4 | 11.5 (0.5-104.5) | 54 | 13.0 | 5.6 | 31.9 | 24.5 (6.5-203.0) |
| Total | 774 | 17.1 | 5.3 | 14.0 | 15 (0.5-230.0) | 35 | 22.9 | 8.5 | 13.2 | 13.5 (0.5-230.0) | 420 | 12.6 | 2.6 | 16.3 | 23.0 (1.0-203.0) |
#Geometric mean (GM).
*Infection intensity calculated in the microfilaremic individuals.
$Only 1 microfilaremic person in these cells.
Univariate analysis of risk factors for antigenemia in Séké Pembé
| Bed nets | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 196 | 155 (79.1) | 41 (20.9) | 0.123 | 131 | 104 (79.7) | 27 (20.6) | 0.436 | 65 | 51 (78.5) | 14 (21.5) | 0.018 |
| Yes | 578 | 485 (83.9) | 93 (16.1) | | 223 | 169 (75.8) | 54 (24.2) | | 355 | 316 (89.0) | 39 (11.0) | |
| Latrines | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 274 | 213 (77.7) | 61 (22.3) | 0.007 | 128 | 92 (71.9) | 36 (28.1) | 0.077 | 146 | 121 (82.9) | 25 (17.1) | 0.042 |
| Yes | 500 | 427 (85.4) | 73 (14.6) | | 226 | 181 (80.1) | 45 (19.9) | | 274 | 246 (89.8) | 28 (10.2) | |
| Water source | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| River | 285 | 236 (82.8) | 49 (17.2) | 0.946 | 131 | 99 (75.6) | 32 (24.4) | 0.596 | 154 | 137 (89.0) | 17 (11.0) | 0.458 |
| Public pump | 489 | 404 (82.6) | 85 (17.4) | | 223 | 174 (78.0) | 49 (22.0) | | 266 | 230 (86.5) | 36 (13.5) | |
| Hunting and/or fishing* | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 368 | 321 (87.2) | 47 (12.8) | 0.003 | 134 | 114 (58.1) | 20 (17.9) | 0.007 | 234 | 207 (88.5) | 27 (11.5) | 0.549 |
| Yes | 370 | 292 (78.9) | 78 (21.1) | | 200 | 145 (72.5) | 55 (27.5) | | 170 | 147 (86.5) | 23 (13.5) | |
| Occasionally sleeping in the bush* (Men only, N = 334) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | NA | NA | NA | - | 222 | 190 (85.6) | 32 (14.4) | <0.001 | NA | NA | NA | - |
| Yes | | | | | 112 | 69 (61.6) | 43 (38.4) | | | | | |
| Anti-helminthic drugs within the last year† | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 639 | 526 (82.3) | 113 (17.7) | 0.553 | 292 | 222 (76.0) | 70 (24.0) | 0.289 | 347 | 304 (87.6) | 43 (12.4) | 0.760 |
| Yes | 135 | 114 (84.4) | 21 (15.6) | | 62 | 51 (82.3) | 11 (17.7) | | 73 | 63 (86.3) | 10 (13.7) | |
| Distance to the field* (km, mean ± standard deviation) | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.7 ± 1.4 | 3.8 ± 1.5 | 0.535 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 3.7 ± 1.4 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 0.935 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.8 ± 1.5 | 0.428 |
*N = 738 (36 missing data).
†1 data missing.
Univariate analysis of risk factors for microfilaremia (mf) in Séké Pembé
| Bed nets | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 196 | 184 (93.9) | 12 (6.1) | 0.554 | 131 | 122 (93.1) | 9 (6.9) | 0.399 | 65 | 63 (95.4) | 3 (4.6) | 0.273 |
| Yes | 577 | 548 (95.0) | 29 (5.0) | | 222 | 201 (90.5) | 21 (9.5) | | 355 | 347 (97.8) | 8 (2.2) | |
| Latrines | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 273 | 252 (92.3) | 21 (7.7) | 0.029 | 127 | 112 (88.2) | 15 (11.8) | 0.094 | 146 | 140 (95.9) | 6 (4.1) | 0.163 |
| Yes | 500 | 480 (96.0) | 20 (4.0) | | 226 | 211 (93.4) | 15 (6.6) | | 274 | 269 (98.2) | 5 (1.8) | |
| Water source | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| River | 285 | 268 (94.0) | 17 (6.0) | 0.531 | 131 | 117 (89.3) | 14 (10.7) | 0.257 | 154 | 151 (98.1) | 3 (1.9) | 0.512 |
| Public pump | 488 | 464 (95.1) | 24 (4.9) | | 222 | 206 (92.8) | 16 (7.2) | | 266 | 258 (97.0) | 8 (3.0) | |
| Hunting and/or fishing* | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 368 | 356 (96.7) | 12 (3.3) | 0.020 | 134 | 128 (95.5) | 6 (4.5) | 0.034 | 234 | 228 (97.4) | 6 (2.6) | 0.893 |
| Yes | 369 | 343 (92.9) | 26 (7.1) | | 199 | 177 (88.9) | 22 (11.1) | | 170 | 166 (97.7) | 4 (2.3) | |
| Occasionally sleeping in the bush* (Men only, N = 334) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | NA | NA | NA | - | 221 | 207 (93.7) | 14 (6.3) | 0.055 | NA | NA | NA | - |
| Yes | | | | | 112 | 98 (87.5) | 14 (12.5) | | | | | |
| Anti-helminthic drugs within the last year† | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| No | 639 | 602 (94.2) | 37 (5.8) | 0.188 | 292 | 265 (90.8) | 27 (9.3) | 0.270 | 347 | 337 (97.1) | 10 (2.9) | 0.462 |
| Yes | 134 | 130 (97.0) | 4 (3.0) | | 61 | 58 (95.1) | 3 (4.9) | | 73 | 72 (98.6) | 1 (1.4) | |
| Distance to the field* (km, mean ± standard deviation) | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 3.8 ± 1.2 | 0.570 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 3.7 ± 1.5 | 0.477 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 3.9 ± 1.2 | 0.865 |
*N = 737 (36 missing data).
†1 data missing.
#1 positive ICT was not tested for microfilaremia.
Figure 2Age-profiles for antigenemia prevalence. Males (solid line), females (dashed line). Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 3Age-profiles for microfilarial prevalence. Males (solid line), females (dashed line). Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors for filarial antigenemia in the total population
| Sex | | | |
| Female | 1 | - | |
| Male | 2.0 | 1.3-3.0 | 0.002 |
| Age (years) | | | |
| 5-10 | 0.1 | 0.0-0.2 | < 0.001 |
| 11-23 | 1 | - | - |
| 24-40 | 1.6 | 0.9-2.6 | 0.081 |
| > 40 | 1.5 | 0.9-2.4 | 0.130 |
| Hunting and/or fishing | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 1.5 | 1.0-2.4 | 0.058 |
| Latrines | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 0.5 | 0.4-0.8 | 0.004 |
Likelihood-ratio test random effect vs. fixed effect model (P = 0.213). N = 738.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors for filarial antigenemia in the male population
| Age (years) | | | |
| 5-10 | 0.1 | 0.0-0.4 | 0.001 |
| 11-23 | 1 | - | - |
| 24-40 | 1.3 | 0.6-2.6 | 0.483 |
| > 40 | 1.2 | 0.6- 2.5 | 0.650 |
| Occasionally sleeping in the bush | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 1.9 | 1.1-3.5 | 0.028 |
| Latrines | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 0.5 | 0.3-0.9 | 0.022 |
| Bed nets | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 1.3 | 0.7-2.4 | 0.410 |
| Intraclass correlation for household | 0.0 |
Likelihood-ratio test random effect vs. fixed effect model (P = 1.000). N = 334.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors for filarial antigenemia in the female population
| Age (years old) | | | |
| 5-10 | 0.04 | 0.0-0.4 | 0.004 |
| 11-23 | 1 | - | - |
| 24-40 | 1.7 | 0.7- 4.1 | 0.269 |
| > 40 | 1.2 | 0.5- 3.0 | 0.654 |
| Bed nets | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 0.4 | 0.1-0.9 | 0.024 |
| Intraclass correlation for household | 0.24 |
Likelihood-ratio test random effect vs. fixed effect model (P = 0.062). N = 420.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors for microfilaremia (mf), total-population model
| Sex | | | |
| Female | 1 | - | |
| Male | 5.4 | 2.1-13.4 | <0.001 |
| Age (years old) | | | |
| 5-10 | 0.03 | 0.0-0.3 | 0.004 |
| 11-23 | 1 | - | - |
| 24-40 | 0.8 | 0.3- 2.3 | 0.741 |
| > 40 | 1.3 | 0.5- 3.5 | 0.595 |
| Latrines | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 0.4 | 0.1-0.9 | 0.035 |
| Bed nets | | | |
| No | 1 | - | |
| Yes | 1.2 | 0.4-3.0 | 0.764 |
| Intraclass correlation for household | 0.488 |
Likelihood-ratio test random effect vs. fixed effect model (p < 0.001). N = 774.