Suppr超能文献

使用生态卫生设施的家庭与使用传统坑式厕所的家庭之间,蠕虫的流行率是否存在差异?在马拉维进行的一项基于厕所的横断面比较研究。

Is there a difference in prevalence of helminths between households using ecological sanitation and those using traditional pit latrines? A latrine based cross sectional comparative study in Malawi.

作者信息

Kumwenda Save, Msefula Chisomo, Kadewa Wilfred, Diness Yohane, Kato Charles, Morse Tracy, Ngwira Bagrey

机构信息

College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Chichiri, P/Bag 360, Blantyre 3, Malawi.

The Polytechnic, University of Malawi, Chichiri, P/Bag 303, Blantyre 3, Malawi.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2017 Jun 9;10(1):200. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2519-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that households using sludge from human excreta for agriculture are at an increased risk of soil transmitted helminths. However, while use of ecological sanitation (EcoSan) latrines is increasing in most African countries including Malawi, few studies have been done to check whether use of such sludge could potentially increase the prevalence of helminthic infections among household members as a results of exposure to faecal sludge/compared to use of traditional latrines.

METHODS

A cross sectional study was done targeting households using EcoSan and traditional pit latrines. Samples were collected from both types of latrines in Chikwawa (rural) and Blantyre (urban) districts. These two districts have a high number of EcoSan latrines in southern region of Malawi. 156 latrines were sampled (n = 95 traditional; n = 61 EcoSan), and processed following standard guidelines using modified triple floatation method. Identification of helminth ova (Ascaris lumbricoides, hookworms, Trichuris trichiura, Taenia spp. and Diphyllobothrium latum) was done using standard microscopy methods. The difference between the prevalence and mean concentration of helminths between the two types of latrines was tested using Chi Square and t test respectively.

RESULTS

Of the total latrines tested, 85.9% (n = 134) had at least one species of helminth while 84.6% (n = 132) had at least a STH, with 82.0% (n = 50) in EcoSan and 86.3% (n = 82) in traditional pit latrines. There was no significant difference between the prevalence of helminths in EcoSan and traditional pit latrines [χ = 0.43 (1), P = 0.5]. The prevalence of Ascaris lumbricoides was significantly higher in EcoSan than in traditional pit latrines [χ = 5.44 (1) p = 0.02] while prevalence of hookworms was significantly higher in traditional pit latrines than in EcoSan latrines [χ = 13.98 (1) p < 0.001]. The highest concentration of helminths per gram of faecal sludge was in traditional pit latrines [31.2 (95% CI 19.1-43.2)] than in EcoSan latrines [26.4 (95% CI 16.5-36.3)].

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between overall prevalence of helminths between households using EcoSan and those using traditional pit latrines. However, Ascaris lumbricoides was significantly higher in households using EcoSan latrines. EcoSan users need awareness on safe ways of handling faecal sludge in order to reduce chances of reinfection from Ascaris lumbricoides. Further research should be undertaken on household members to identify those infected and potential routes of infection to enable preventive targeting.

摘要

背景

研究表明,使用人类排泄物污泥进行农业生产的家庭感染土壤传播蠕虫的风险增加。然而,尽管包括马拉维在内的大多数非洲国家生态卫生(EcoSan)厕所的使用正在增加,但很少有研究来检查与使用传统厕所相比,使用此类污泥是否可能因接触粪便污泥而增加家庭成员中蠕虫感染的患病率。

方法

针对使用EcoSan和传统坑式厕所的家庭开展了一项横断面研究。在奇夸瓦(农村)和布兰太尔(城市)地区从这两种类型的厕所中采集样本。这两个地区在马拉维南部有大量的EcoSan厕所。对156个厕所进行了采样(n = 95个传统厕所;n = 61个EcoSan厕所),并按照标准指南使用改良的三重浮选法进行处理。使用标准显微镜方法对蠕虫卵(蛔虫、钩虫、鞭虫、绦虫属和阔节裂头绦虫)进行鉴定。分别使用卡方检验和t检验来检验两种类型厕所之间蠕虫患病率和平均浓度的差异。

结果

在测试的所有厕所中,85.9%(n = 134)至少有一种蠕虫,而84.6%(n = 132)至少有一种土源性蠕虫,EcoSan厕所中为82.0%(n = 50),传统坑式厕所中为86.3%(n = 82)。EcoSan厕所和传统坑式厕所中蠕虫的患病率没有显著差异[χ = 0.43(1),P = 0.5]。EcoSan厕所中蛔虫的患病率显著高于传统坑式厕所[χ = 5.44(1),p = 0.02],而钩虫的患病率在传统坑式厕所中显著高于EcoSan厕所[χ = 13.98(1),p < 0.001]。每克粪便污泥中蠕虫的最高浓度在传统坑式厕所中[31.2(95%CI 19.1 - 43.2)],高于EcoSan厕所[26.4(95%CI 16.5 - 36.3)]。

结论

使用EcoSan的家庭和使用传统坑式厕所的家庭之间蠕虫的总体患病率没有显著差异。然而,使用EcoSan厕所的家庭中蛔虫的患病率显著更高。EcoSan用户需要了解处理粪便污泥的安全方法,以减少蛔虫再感染的机会。应进一步对家庭成员进行研究,以确定感染者和潜在的感染途径,从而实现预防性靶向。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8654/5466731/0c8d3ee3afc2/13104_2017_2519_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验