| Literature DB >> 31019535 |
Agodio Loukouri1, Aboulaye Méité2, Olivier K Kouadio3,4, Norbert N Djè2, Gotré Trayé-Bi2, Benjamin G Koudou3,4, Eliézer K N'Goran1,3.
Abstract
Evaluation of soil-transmitted helminths (STHs) and implementation of additional interventions are required in the region of a filariasis control program, given that antifilariasis drugs also have a beneficial effect on STHs. Thus, this study determines the extensive epidemiology of STHs to improve their successful control. Stool samples were analyzed using the Kato-Katz method. Chi-squared and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to measure differences in infection rates and intensities, respectively, and logistic regression identified the risks of infection. The main intestinal helminths (A. lumbricoides, hookworm [N. americanus], S. mansoni, and T. trichiura) were found in the population. The overall prevalence of STHs was 19.5%. The prevalence of hookworm, the predominant species, ranged from 2% (n=6) to 28% (n=97). The overall prevalence of the other intestinal helminths was less than 6% (n=18). Intensity of hookworm was mostly light with a range from 1.6% (n=5) to 25.9% (n=90). However, the intensity of the species was significantly greater in Soribadougou compared to the other localities. Heavy infection was found in old children and adults but not in young children. Open defecation (OR=3.23, p≤0.05), dog/cat raising (OR=1.94, p≤0.05), farming (OR=14.10, p≤0.05), and irrigated culture (OR=3.23, p≤0.05) were positively associated with hookworm. It was observed that the participants missed the follow-up examinations due to trip (32.7%) or misunderstanding (15%) and lack of information (11.8%) of the purpose of the survey. Thus, to sustain the control of STHs, the MDA program should target the entire community and add education about the use of toilets, best practices of farming, and dog/cat raising.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31019535 PMCID: PMC6451820 DOI: 10.1155/2019/7658594
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Trop Med ISSN: 1687-9686
Figure 1Map of study villages from the departments of Akoupé and Abengourou in eastern Côte d'Ivoire.
Figure 2Participation over time for intestinal parasitological examinations in eastern settings of Côte d'Ivoire. (a) Relatively constant number of participants. (b) Significant decrease in the number of participants. (c) Bell-shaped evolution in the number of participants with a peak at first follow-up.
Prevalence and intensity of intestinal helminths in eastern settings of Côte d'Ivoire.
| Intestinal helminths | Study villages | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahéoua | Soribadougou | Pokoukro | Prakro | Yadio | Yaobabikro | |
|
| 9 (2.9) | 5 (1.4) | 13 (2.4) | 18 (6.2) | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.6) |
|
| 0 (0.0) | 2 (0.6) | 8 (1.5) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
|
| 2 (0.7) | 4 (1.2) | 2 (0.4) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (0.8) | 1 (0.6) |
|
| 6(2.0)c | 97(28.0)a | 143(26.7)a | 73(25.3)a | 14(5.7)b | 21(11.6)b |
| Geometric mean, epg | 126.4 | 313.1 | 135.2 | 162 | 139.3 | 141.4 |
| (95% CI) | (22.7-703.4) | (241.7-405.5) | (107.3-170.4) | (116.4-225.4) | (68.8-282.2) | (81.6-244.9) |
| Level of intensity | ||||||
| No, n′ (%) | 300 (98.0) | 250 (72.0) | 393 (73.3) | 216 (74.8) | 230 (94.3) | 160 (88.4) |
| Light, n (%) | 5 (1.6) | 90 (25.9) | 138 (25.7) | 70 (24.3) | 13 (5.3) | 20 (11.0) |
| Moderate, n (%) | 1 (0.4) | 2 (0.6) | 3 (0.6) | 2 (0.6) | 1 (0.4) | 0 (0.0) |
| Heavy, n (%) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (1.5) | 2 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.6) |
|
| 306 (100) | 347 (100) | 536 (100) | 289 (100) | 244 (100) | 181 (100) |
N: number of participants per study village, n: number of infected participants, n′: number of noninfected participants, epg: number of egg per gram of stool, %: percentage, a, b, c: Chi-squared test significant ( p≤0.05), and : Kruskal-Wallis and independent t-tests significant ( p≤0.05).
Figure 3Prevalence and intensity categories of hookworm infection, stratified by age groups in eastern settings of Côte d'Ivoire. (a) Soribadougou. (b) Pokoukro. (c) Prakro. (d) Yaobabikro. (e) Yadio. (f) Ahéoua.
Factors associated with hookworm infection in eastern settings of Côte d'Ivoire.
| Explanatory variable | Pokoukro | Prakro | Soribadougou | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||||||
| Sex | n (%) | OR |
| OR |
| n (%) | OR |
| OR |
| n (%) | OR |
| OR |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Male | 17 ( | 0.82 |
| NA |
| 28 ( | 5.09 |
| 4.59 |
| 16 ( | 0.69 |
| NA |
|
| Female | 10 ( | 1 ( | 26 ( | ||||||||||||
| School attending | |||||||||||||||
| Yes | 9 ( | 0.72 |
| NA |
| 29 ( | 2.07 |
| 3.68 |
| 23 ( | 0.20 |
| NA |
|
| No | 18 ( | 10 ( | 19 ( | ||||||||||||
| School level | |||||||||||||||
| Primary school | 25 ( | 0.49 |
| NA |
| 35 ( | NA |
| NA |
| 40 ( | 0.42 |
| NA |
|
| College/high school | 2 ( | 4 ( | 2 ( | ||||||||||||
| Outside defecation | |||||||||||||||
| Most of the time | 20 ( | 3.41 |
| 2.25 |
| 36 | 16.8 |
| 11.6 |
| 28 ( | 3.28 |
| 3.23 |
|
| No/rarely | 7 ( | 3 ( | 14 ( | ||||||||||||
| Barefoot walking | |||||||||||||||
| Most of the time | 15 ( | 2.678 |
| 1.41 |
| 23 ( | 1.03 |
| NA |
| 18 ( | 0.60 |
| NA |
|
| No/rarely | 12 ( | 16 ( | 24 ( | ||||||||||||
| Occupation | |||||||||||||||
| Yes | 26 ( | 0.74 |
| NA |
| 39 ( | NA |
| NA |
| 34 ( | 1.54 |
| 0.95 |
|
| No | 1 ( | 0 | 8 ( | ||||||||||||
| Farming activity | |||||||||||||||
| Yes | 24 ( | 1.78 |
| NA |
| 31 ( | 5.42 |
| 14.1 |
| 32 ( | 1.37 |
| 0.51 |
|
| No | 3 ( | 8 ( | 10 ( | ||||||||||||
| Irrigated culture | |||||||||||||||
| Yes | 19 ( | 4.53 |
| 3.23 |
| 18 ( | 1.74 |
| NA |
| 29 ( | 1.31 |
| 0.66 |
|
| No | 8 ( | 21 ( | 13 ( | ||||||||||||
| Raising dog/cat | |||||||||||||||
| Yes | 19 ( | 1.644 |
| NA |
| 1 ( | NA |
| NA |
| 27 ( | 2.03 |
| 1.94 |
|
| No | 8 ( | 38 ( | 15 (46) | ||||||||||||
n: number of positive individuals, NA: multivariate analysis not applicable, and OR: odd ratio. : p value ≤ 0.2 . Statistically significant (p≤0.05).