| Literature DB >> 28934218 |
Larissa Gabrielle Curval1, Adriana de Oliveira França1, Henrique Jorge Fernandes2, Rinaldo Pôncio Mendes3, Lídia Raquel de Carvalho4, Minoru German Higa1, Eduardo de Castro Ferreira5, Maria Elizabeth Cavalheiros Dorval1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intestinal parasitic infections constitute a public health issue in developing countries, with prevalence rates as high as 90%, a figure set to escalate as the socioeconomic status of affected populations deteriorates. Investigating the occurrence of these infections among inmates is critical, since this group is more vulnerable to the spread of a number of infectious illnesses.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28934218 PMCID: PMC5608187 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182248
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Sociodemographic characteristics of inmates serving sentences at three prison facilities in Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil (n = 510).
| Variables | |
|---|---|
| Male | 430 (84.3) |
| Female | 80 (15.7) |
| Mato Grosso do Sul | 355 (69.6) |
| Elsewhere in Brazil | 155 (30.4) |
| 18–28 | 173 (33.9) |
| 29–39 | 221 (43.3) |
| >39 | 116 (22.8) |
| Married | 188 (36.9) |
| Single | 322 (63.1) |
| Brown | 245 (48.0) |
| White | 219 (42.9) |
| Black | 42 (8.2) |
| Yellow | 4 (0.9) |
| Illiterate | 10 (2.0) |
| Primary | 345 (67.7) |
| Secondary | 142 (27.8) |
| Tertiary | 13 (2.5) |
| 0–1 | 143 (28.0) |
| 1–2 | 153 (30.0) |
| 2–3 | 128 (25.1) |
| ≥4 | 86 (16.9) |
n = number of participants
Cases of single- and mixed-species intestinal infection among positively diagnosed inmates, by prison facility.
Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil (n = 103).
| Species | Women’s Prison | Maximum Security Prison | Semi-open Colony | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17/80 | 59/240 | 27/190 | 103/510 | |
| | 0 | 6 (10.2) | 4 (14.8) | 10 (9.7) |
| | 0 | 7 (11.9) | 1 (3.7) | 8 (7.8) |
| | 0 | 2 (3.4) | 0 | 2 (1.9) |
| | 1(5.9) | 7 (11.9) | 3 (11.1) | 11 (10.7) |
| | 0 | 11(18.6) | 2 (7.4) | 13 (12.6) |
| | 0 | 3 (5.1) | 1 (3.7) | 4 (3.9) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 0 | 1 (1.7) | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| 2 (11.7) | 37 (62.7) | 11 (40.7) | 50 (48.6) | |
| | 7 (41.1) | 16 (27.1) | 8 (29.6) | 31 (30.1) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 4 (14.8) | 5 (4.8) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 2 (11.8) | 3 (5.1) | 2 (7.4) | 7 (6.7) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 1 (3.7) | 2 (1.9) |
| | 0 | 1 (1.7) | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.0) |
| | 0 | 0 | 1 (3.7) | 1 (1.0) |
| | 0 | 2 (3.4) | 0 | 2 (1.9) |
| 15 (88.2) | 22 (37.3) | 16 (59.3) | 53 (51.4) | |
Prevalence rates of intestinal parasites among inmates serving sentences at three prison facilities in Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil (semi-open regime, n = 27; closed-regime Maximum Security, n = 59; closed-regime Women’s Prison, n = 17; total positive cases, n = 103).
| Parasite | Semi-open Colony | Maximum Security Prison | Women’s Prison | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 3.7 | 4.2 | 3.8 | >0.05 |
| | 1.6ab | 4.2a | 0.0b | <0.05 |
| | 1.1 | 1.3 | 3.8 | |
| | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 | >0.05 |
| | 5.3b | 11.7a | 13.8a | <0.05 |
| | 4.2 | 5.4 | 8.8 | >0.05 |
| | 8.4b | 12.9ab | 20.0a | <0.05 |
| | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.3 | >0.05 |
* Different letters (a,b) on the same row indicate significant differences (p < 0.05, Tukey’s test).
Logistic regression analysis of structural, social, and behavioral factors associated with prevalence of intestinal parasitic infection among inmates.
Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil.
| Structural and social factors | Prevalence of parasitic infection( | Odds ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| WP | 17 (16.5) | 0.031 | |
| MSP | 59 (57.3) | ||
| SOC | 27 (26.2) | ||
| WP | 0.83 (0.45–1.53) | 0.545 | |
| SOP | 1.63 (0.83–3.12) | 0.156 | |
| MSP | 1.97 (1.19–3.25) | 0.008 | |
| Sewage system | 54 (52.4) | 1.03 (0.67–1.59) | 0.881 |
| Cesspool | 49 (47.6) | ||
| 1–4 | 20 (19.4) | 0.155 | |
| 5–8 | 15 (14.6) | ||
| 9–12 | 32 (31.0) | ||
| 13–16 | 17 (16.5) | ||
| >16 | 19 (18.5) | ||
| 18–28 | 35 (34.0) | 0.902 | |
| 29–39 | 43 (41.7) | ||
| >39 | 25 (24.3) | ||
| ≤2 months | 29 (28.2) | 0.6323 | |
| >2 months to 2 years | 40 (38.8) | ||
| >2–9 years | 32 (31.1) | ||
| ≥10 years | 2 (1.9) | ||
| Yes | 97 (94.2) | 1.74 (0.65–4.65) | 0.271 |
| No | 6 (5.8) | ||
| Yes | 18 (17.5) | 10.18 (5.86–17.66) | <0.001 |
| No | 85 (82.5) | ||
| Yes | 58 (56.3) | 1.21 (0.78–1.85) | 0.393 |
| No | 45 (43.7) | ||
| Yes | 16 (15.5) | 1.09 (0.60–1.98) | 0.774 |
| No | 87 (84.5) | ||
| Yes | 45 (43,7) | 1.16 (0.75–1.71) | 0.498 |
| No | 58 (56.3) |
1WP: Women’s Prison
2MSP: Maximum Security Prison
3SOC: Semi-open Colony
4CI: confidence interval
*Odds ratios were considered significantly different from 1.0 when p < 0.05.
Subjects were asked whether they had undergone a stool test or received prophylactic antiparasitic treatment in the previous two years.
Symptoms reported by inmates with positive parasitological stool tests.
Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil (n = 103).
| Symptoms | Prevalence ( | Odds ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | 15 (14.6) | 1.12 (0.65–2.12) | 0.560 |
| No | 88 (85.4) | ||
| Yes | 18 (17.5) | 1.478 (0.84–2.58) | 0.170 |
| No | 85 (82.5) | ||
| Yes | 4 (3.9) | 1.279 (0.43–3.84) | 0.660 |
| No | 99 (96.1) | ||
| Yes | 32 (31.1) | 1.34 (0.84–2.13) | 0.220 |
| No | 71 (68.9) | ||
| Yes | 23 (22.3) | 1.58 (0.95–2.63) | 0.080 |
| No | 80 (77.7) | ||
| Yes | 25 (24.3) | 1.03 (0.62–1.71) | 0.909 |
| No | 78 (75.7) | ||
| Yes | 13 (12.6) | 1.54 (0.81–2.90) | 0.183 |
| No | 90 (87.4) | ||
| Yes | 8 (7.8) | 1.19 (0.53–2.64) | 0.673 |
| No | 95 (92.2) |
*Odds ratios were considered significantly different from 1.0 when p < 0.05.
Subjects were asked about the presence or occasional expulsion of worms in the previous two years.
Fig 1Number of symptoms experienced by group according to the results of parasitological examination.
Symptoms presented by the studied population,distributed according to their number and percentage of patients with positive parasitological examination (red) or negative parasitological examination (blue).