| Literature DB >> 35464359 |
Nicholas Ngwili1,2, Lian Thomas1,3, Samuel Githigia2, Nancy Johnson4, Raphael Wahome2, Kristina Roesel1,5.
Abstract
Taenia (T.) solium is a zoonotic parasite causing three diseases: Taeniasis and cysticercosis in humans and porcine cysticercosis in pigs. Although biomedically, the transmission of the parasite can be easily interrupted at six points along the life cycle, the contextual factors that may influence the adoption of these control strategies in Uganda remain unclear. This study assessed the stakeholders' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions relating to the six control strategies for T. solium infections in Kamuli and Hoima districts, Uganda. A total of 22 focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted with pig farmers, community leaders, pig/pork traders, animal health assistants, and human health assistants. In addition, nine key informant interviews were held with senior officials in the ministries of agriculture and health and other relevant agencies at the district level. The results showed differential, limited, and fragmented knowledge on T. solium infections among stakeholders. Pig farmers, community leaders, and pig/pork traders had almost no knowledge and were often confused regarding the differences existing between T. solium and other gastro-intestinal infections in pigs and humans. Pig confinement, pit latrine construction, coverage, maintenance, and sustained use are influenced by cultural, socio-economic, and physical/ environmental factors of the study population and area. Proper sensitisation programmes and health education interventions should target all, but with appropriately focused material to suit the different stakeholder categories. Reminders or nudges may be needed to ensure that increase in knowledge translates to changes in practise. Intervention programmes should also aim to overcome challenges created by the various contextual factors operating in the specific endemic areas.Entities:
Keywords: Taenia solium; attitudes; control strategies; knowledge; perceptions
Year: 2022 PMID: 35464359 PMCID: PMC9021822 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.833721
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Figure 1Map of Uganda showing the study districts (shaded in yellow).
Stakeholder categories targeted for data collection and their description.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Pig farmers | Pig farmers randomly from a list of pig farmers from 30 villages | They are responsible for control of the parasite at the intermediate and final host stage by practising proper hygiene and good pig husbandry. | FGD |
| Community leaders (LC1) | Selected randomly from villages across 3 sub-counties | They are village leaders and are the link between national government administration and community. They are involved in enforcing latrine use and other bylaws within the village. | FGD |
| Animal health assistants | Purposively invited through the District veterinary officer and were drawn from the different sub-counties in the district. | They oversee meat inspection and promotion of good animal husbandry at sub-county level. | FGD |
| Human health assistants | Purposively selected and invited through the District health officer and were drawn from the different sub-counties in the district. | They oversee human health activities in a sub-county and act as the heads of level 3 health facilities (the government health facility at the sub-county level | FGD |
| Pig/pork traders | Selected by snowballing from different sub-counties within the district starting from the district headquarters. Three traders were picked from each sub-county. | They buy pigs from farmers and operate butcheries and pork joints at the sub-country level where they sell raw and ready-to-eat pork. | FGD |
| District veterinary officers (DVO) | One officer from each district of study. Hoima district was recently subdivided in to 2 and therefore 2 DVOs were included. | They oversee veterinary and animal production in the district including meat inspection. | KII |
| District health officers (DHO) | One officer from each district of study (1 from Kamuli and 2 from Hoima district). | They oversee human health activities in the district including promotion of community hygiene. | KII |
| Private company (Devenish Nutrition in Hoima) | Outreach officer | The private company is involved in training of farmers and sale of inputs to pig farmers. | KII |
| Catholic NGO (HOCADEO-Hoima) | Veterinary extension officer | They are involved in promotion of pig husbandry and general household hygiene including toilet construction | KII |
| Neglected Tropical disease focal person under vector control division Ministry of Health–Kamuli | One official in Kamuli | They oversee mass drug administration campaigns in the district to control schistosomiasis. Praziquantel which is the drug of choice also treats taeniasis. | KII |
| National Animal Genetic Resources centre and Databank (NAGRIC & DB) | Head of community breeding programme | They are involved in extension work promoting improved pig husbandry. | KII |
| Iowa state university Uganda programme | The head of programme in Kamuli field office | They are involved in extension work promoting improved pig husbandry as well as household nutrition. | KII |
Figure 2The “let's break the pork tapeworm life cycle” poster: source (10).
Demographic characteristics of the study participant categories.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of FGD | Men pig farmers | 3 | 3 |
| Women pig farmers | 3 | 3 | |
| Animal health assistants | 1 | 1 | |
| Human health assistants | 1 | 1 | |
| Community leaders | 1 | 1 | |
| Pig/pork traders | 1 | 1 | |
| Number of FGD participants | Men pig farmers | 28 | 28 |
| Women pig farmers | 29 | 31 | |
| Total | 57 | 59 | |
| Key informants (male and female) | Animal health assistants | 10 | 8 |
| Human health assistants | 10 | 10 | |
| Community leaders | 10 | 9 | |
| Pig/pork traders | 10 | 9 | |
| Pig farmers' level of education (%) | None | 5.6% | 0.0 |
| Primary | 57.4% | 45.8% | |
| Secondary | 37.0% | 44.1% | |
| Tertiary | 0.0 | 10.2% | |
| Pig farmers' mean age (in years) | Men | 44.3 | 45.7 |
| Women | 44.3 | 40.7 | |
| Combined | 44.3 | 43.2 | |
| Mean number of pigs | 3.3 | 4.5 |