| Literature DB >> 32733575 |
Deiviane A Calegar1, Kerla J L Monteiro1,2, Andressa B Gonçalves1, Márcio N Boia3, Lauren H Jaeger1,4, Beatriz C Nunes1,5, Filipe A Carvalho-Costa1,2.
Abstract
This study aims to assess the prevalence, distribution, and etiological profile of intestinal parasitism in children living in periurban areas in Cachoeiras de Macacu, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. A community-based cross-sectional survey (n = 479) was carried out. Prevalence of infection with G. duodenalis and E. histolytica/E. dispar was 8.6% (n = 41) and 13.4% (n = 64), respectively. Infection with G. duodenalis was significantly more frequent among children living in poor families (24/187 (12.8%) vs. 16/272 (5.9%); prevalence ratio (PR) = 2.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-3.99; p=0.011). This difference was also significant for infection with any pathogenic parasite (43/187 (23%) vs. 40/272 (14/7%); PR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.06-2.30; p=0.026). In addition, people residing in houses with more than four inhabitants showed significantly higher positivity for infections with G. duodenalis and with E. histolytica/E. dispar (22/138 (15.9%) vs. 16/311 (5.1%); PR = 3.09; 95% CI = 1.68-5.71; p < 0.001 for G. duodenalis and 32/138 (23.2%) vs. 30/311 (9.6%); PR = 2.40; 95% CI = 1.52-3.79; p < 0.001 for E. histolytica/E. dispar). Laboratory diagnosis of protozoan enteric infections and effective drugs for their treatment are unmet goals in the primary health care system. Therefore, giardiasis and amebiasis are neglected conditions.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32733575 PMCID: PMC7376428 DOI: 10.1155/2020/3134849
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Trop Med ISSN: 1687-9686
Figure 1Basic rocket ship design. The rocket ship is propelled with three thrusters and features a single viewing window. The nose cone is detachable upon impact.
Figure 2Prevalence rates of infections by different intestinal parasites in children aged 0–14 years in three communities of Cachoeiras de Macacu, Rio de Janeiro, 2018.
Distribution of Giardia duodenalis and E. histolytica/E. dispar infections in Cachoeiras de Macacu, RJ, 2018.
| Locality |
|
| Any pathogenic protozoa | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prevalence | Prevalence ratio |
| Prevalence | Prevalence ratio |
| Prevalence | Prevalence ratio |
| |
| Papucaia | 13/209 (6.2%) | 1 | 26/209 (12.4%) | 1 | 31/209 (14.8%) | 1 | |||
| Marubaí | 6/90 (6.7%) | 1.07 (0.42–2.73) | 1 | 12/90 (13.3%) | 1.07 (0.56–2.02) | 0.850 | 15/90 (16.7%) | 1.12 (0.63–1.97) | 0.727 |
| Ribeira | 22/180 (12.2%) | 1.96 (1.01–3.78) | 0.049 | 26/180 (14.4%) | 1.16 (0.70–1.92) | 0.654 | 40/180 (22.2%) | 1.49 (0.97–2.29) | 0.066 |
| Age group (years) | |||||||||
| 0–2 | 2/94 (2.1%) | 1 | 4/94 (4.3%) | 1 | 6/94 (6.4%) | 1 | |||
| 3–6 | 17/154 (11%) | 5.18 (1.22–21.95) | 0.012 | 23/154 (14.9%) | 3.50 (1.25–9.83) | 0.010 | 32/154 (20.8%) | 3.25 (1.41–7.49) | 0.001 |
| 7–15 | 22/231 (9.5%) | 4.47 (1.07–18.65) | 0.019 | 37/231 (16%) | 3.76 (1.38–10.26) | 0.002 | 48/231 (20.8%) | 3.25 (1.44–7.34) | <0.001 |
| Income per capita per month | |||||||||
| <44 USD1 | 24/187 (12.8%) | 2.18 (1.19–3.99) | 0.011 | 31/187 (16.6%) | 1.45 (0.91–2.30) | 0.127 | 43/187 (23%) | 1.56 (1.06–2.30) | 0.026 |
| ≥44 USD2 | 16/272 (5.9%) | 1 | 31/272 (11.4%) | 1 | 40/272 (14.7%) | 1 | |||
| Number of persons in the household | |||||||||
| ≤4 | 16/311 (5.1%) | 1 | 30/311 (9.6%) | 1 | 41/311 (13.2%) | 1 | |||
| >4 | 22/138 (15.9%) | 3.09 (1.68–5.71) | <0.001 | 32/138 (23.2%) | 2.40 (1.52–3.79) | <0.001 | 40/138 (29%) | 2.19 (1.49–3.23) | <0.001 |
| Gender | |||||||||
| Male | 21/250 (8.4%) | 1 | 39/250 (15.6%) | 1 | 49/250 (19.6%) | 1 | |||
| Female | 20/229 (8.7) | 1.03 (0.57–1.86) | 1 | 25/229 (10.9%) | 0.69 (0.43–1.11) | 0.141 | 37/229 (16.2%) | 0.82 (0.55–1.21) | 0.342 |
USD 1 = BRL 4. 95% CI. 1Poverty. 2Not poverty.