| Literature DB >> 26624994 |
Jade Benjamin-Chung1, Arifa Nazneen2, Amal K Halder2, Rashidul Haque2, Abdullah Siddique2, Muhammed Salah Uddin2, Kim Koporc3, Benjamin F Arnold1, Alan E Hubbard1, Leanne Unicomb2, Stephen P Luby4, David G Addiss3, John M Colford1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The combination of deworming and improved sanitation or hygiene may result in greater reductions in soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infection than any single intervention on its own. We measured STH prevalence in rural Bangladesh and assessed potential interactions among deworming, hygienic latrines, and household finished floors.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26624994 PMCID: PMC4666415 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004256
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Data collected.
This figure shows the number of surveys returned, samples analyzed, and final sample size for this analysis.
Helminth infection prevalence by age, helminth, and infection intensity.
| Child 1–4 years (n = 549) | Child 5–14 years (n = 549) | Women 15–49 years (n = 532) | All ages (n = 1,630) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female (%) | 47.7 | 50.3 | 100 | 65.6 | |
| Dewormed in last six months (%) | 49.3 | 52.4 | 20.9 | 41.0 | |
| Mean months since deworming | 2.8 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 2.8 | |
| Source of deworming | |||||
| Home/village | 68.7 | 37.4 | 76.6 | 56.5 | |
| Health clinic | 26.9 | 15.7 | 22.5 | 21.4 | |
| School | 3.4 | 46.9 | 0.0 | 21.5 | |
| Other | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.6 | |
| Any infection | 25.7 | 40.1 | 30.3 | 32.0 | |
| Multiple infections | 7.8 | 12.4 | 7.5 | 9.3 | |
|
| |||||
| Prevalence (%) | 12.9 | 14.4 | 11.8 | 13.1 | |
| Mean eggs per gram | 318 | 279 | 387 | 287 | |
| No infection (%) | 87.1 | 85.6 | 88.2 | 86.9 | |
| Light infection (%) | 11.8 | 12.6 | 10.7 | 11.7 | |
| Moderate/heavy infection (%) | 1.1 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 1.3 | |
| Hookworm | |||||
| Prevalence (%) | 2.6 | 7.7 | 6.4 | 5.5 | |
| Mean eggs per gram | 8 | 2 | 12 | 10 | |
| No infection (%) | 97.4 | 92.3 | 93.6 | 94.5 | |
| Light infection (%) | 2.6 | 7.7 | 6.4 | 5.5 | |
| Moderate/heavy infection (%) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
|
| |||||
| Prevalence (%) | 17.1 | 27.5 | 18.2 | 21 | |
| Mean eggs per gram | 43 | 32 | 74 | 22 | |
| No infection (%) | 82.9 | 72.5 | 81.8 | 79 | |
| Light infection (%) | 16.8 | 26.4 | 18 | 20.4 | |
| Moderate/heavy infection (%) | 0.4 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 0.6 | |
|
| |||||
| Prevalence (%) | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.03 | |
| Mean eggs per gram | 4 | 0 | 10 | 2 | |
| No infection (%) | — | — | — | — | |
| Light infection (%) | — | — | — | — | |
| Moderate/heavy infection (%) | — | — | — | — |
aIncludes Enterobius infections
Fig 2Map of soil-transmitted helminth prevalence in Bangladesh.
We mapped STH prevalence in each study cluster for which valid GPS coordinates were available (n = 99). Panel A shows the cluster-level prevalence of any STH infection, Panel B shows the prevalence of Ascaris lumbricoides, Panel C shows the prevalence of hookworm, and Panel D shows the prevalence of Trichuris trichiura.
Prevalence ratios for deworming, hygienic latrine access, and finished floors.
|
| Hookworm |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exposure (yes vs. no) | n | PR (95% CI) | PR (95% CI) | PR (95% CI) |
| Unadjusted | ||||
| Deworming | 1622 | 0.60 (0.46,0.80) | 0.79 (0.52,1.21) | 1.02 (0.84,1.24) |
| Access to hygienic latrine | 1629 | 0.78 (0.59,1.04) | 0.60 (0.37,0.97) | 0.93 (0.75,1.14) |
| Finished floor | 1630 | 0.45 (0.26,0.77) | 0.32 (0.12,0.86) | 0.88 (0.66,1.19) |
| Adjusted | ||||
| Deworming | 1573 | 0.53 (0.40,0.71) | 0.93 (0.60,1.44) | 0.90 (0.74,1.08) |
| Access to hygienic latrine | 1579 | 0.91 (0.67,1.24) | 0.73 (0.43,1.24) | 1.03 (0.84,1.27) |
| Finished floor | 1580 | 0.56 (0.32,0.97) | 0.48 (0.16,1.45) | 0.98 (0.72,1.33) |
aThe number of observations was slightly lower for adjusted prevalence ratios because some observations of potential confounders had missing values.
bPRs estimated using modified Poisson regression and adjusted for age, sex, sub-district, household wealth, cluster-level wealth, and mother’s education level.
Adjusted prevalence ratios for single and combined deworming and hygienic latrine access and relative excess risk due to interaction.
|
| Hookworm |
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deworming | Hygienic Latrine | n/N | aPR | n/N | aPR | n/N | aPR |
| - | - | 106/652 | (ref) | 47/652 | (ref) | 130/652 | (ref) |
| + | - | 49/445 | 0.55 (0.40,0.77) | 23/445 | 0.78 (0.48,1.28) | 107/445 | 1.02 (0.81,1.27) |
| - | + | 44/305 | 1.00 (0.72,1.39) | 11/305 | 0.55 (0.28,1.08) | 70/305 | 1.19 (0.92,1.54) |
| + | + | 14/219 | 0.41 (0.24,0.73) | 9/219 | 0.82 (0.38,1.75) | 35/219 | 0.82 (0.59,1.14) |
| RERI | -0.36 (-2.18,0.58) | 0.49 (-0.73,1.16) | -0.48 (-1.14,0.00) | ||||
aPRs adjusted for age, sex, household floor type, geographic district, household wealth, cluster-level wealth, and mother’s education level.
bRelative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). A RERI = 0 indicates no interaction on the additive scale, RERI>0 indicates synergistic interaction on the additive scale for monotonic aPRs, RERI>1 indicating synergistic interaction on the additive scale for non-monotonic aPRs, and RERI<0 indicates antagonistic interaction on the additive scale.
PRs adjusted for age, sex, hygienic latrine access, geographic district, household wealth, cluster-level wealth, and mother’s education level
95% Confidence intervals were not estimated because there were strata with fewer than 5 observations for this measure.
Adjusted prevalence ratios for single and combined deworming and household finished floor and relative excess risk due to interaction.
|
| Hookworm |
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deworming | Finished floor | n/N | aPR | n/N | aPR | n/N | aPR |
| - | - | 141/847 | (ref) | 55/847 | (ref) | 177/847 | (ref) |
| + | - | 59/572 | 0.53 (0.39,0.71) | 31/572 | 0.93 (0.60,1.44) | 126/572 | 0.91 (0.75,1.11) |
| - | + | 9/110 | 0.60 (0.32,1.15) | 3/110 | 0.54 (0.16,1.87) | 23/110 | 1.12 (0.75,1.67) |
| + | + | 4/93 | 0.28 (0.11,0.75) | 1/93 | 0.27 (0.04,2.07) | 16/93 | 0.85 (0.54,1.33) |
| RERI | 0.56 (-3.64,2.40) | -1.14 (—,—) | -0.18 (-1.48,0.37) | ||||
aPRs adjusted for age, sex, household floor type, geographic district, household wealth, cluster-level wealth, and mother’s education level.
bRelative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). A RERI = 0 indicates no interaction on the additive scale, RERI>0 indicates synergistic interaction on the additive scale for monotonic aPRs, RERI>1 indicating synergistic interaction on the additive scale for non-monotonic aPRs, and RERI<0 indicates antagonistic interaction on the additive scale.
cPRs adjusted for age, sex, hygienic latrine access, geographic district, household wealth, cluster-level wealth, and mother’s education level
d95% Confidence intervals were not estimated because there were strata with fewer than 5 observations for this measure.
Fig 3STH prevalence by exposure to deworming, hygienic latrines, and finished floors.
Panel A shows the prevalence of each helminth among those who did not receive deworming (D-), those who did receive deworming (D+), those who did not have access to a hygienic latrine (L-), and those who did have access to a hygienic latrine (L+). Panel B shows the prevalence of each helminth among those who did not receive deworming (D-), those who did receive deworming (D+), those whose household did not have a finished floor (F-), and those whose household did have a finished floor (F+).
Fig 4Cluster-level STH prevalence by cluster-level hygienic latrine coverage.
Panel A shows the cluster-level prevalence of Ascaris, Panel B shows the prevalence of hookworm, and Panel C shows the prevalence of Trichuris by the proportion of respondents with hygienic latrines in each cluster.