An Epidemiological Study of Intestinal Parasites of Dogs from Yucatan, Mexico, and Their Risk to Public Health

Abstract

The prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs and factors associated were studied in a rural community of Yucatan (southern Mexico), with special attention to those gastrointestinal parasites potentially transmitted to man. One hundred thirty dogs from 91 households were studied. Fecal samples were processed by the centrifugation-flotation and the McMaster techniques. To determine factors associated with zoonotic parasites in dogs, univariate analysis was performed, using sex, age, and body condition as independent variables. Variables with p < 0.2 were analyzed by a logistic regression. Of 130 dogs, 104 were positive for the presence of intestinal parasites, representing a prevalence of 80%. Eggs of four species of helminths (Ancylostoma caninum, Thichuris vulpis, Toxocara canis, and Dipylidium caninum) and coccidian oocysts were detected. A. caninum was the most prevalent parasite (73.8%), followed by T. vulpis (25.4%), T. canis (6.2%), D. caninum (2.3%), and coccidian oocysts (2.3%). The majority of dogs were infected by only one species of parasite (70/130, 53.8%). Mixed infection caused by two or three zoonotic parasites were discovered in 21.3% (30/130) and 3.1% (4/130), respectively. A. caninum showed the highest egg output (42.3% of dogs had ≥ 500 eggs per gram). Factors associated with zoonotic parasites were age (<2 years old; odds ratio = 5.30, p = 0.029) and body condition (poor body condition; odds ratio = 6.69, p = 0.026). In conclusion, young dogs from rural Yucatan, Mexico, with poor body condition had a higher prevalence of intestinal zoonotic parasites as these factors were associated with a higher risk of becoming infected.

Parasitic Zoonoses in Humans and Their Dogs from a Rural Community of Tropical Mexico

“…These actions could explain the lower prevalence and intensity of infection reported at this time categorized between low and medium intensity of infection. In the specific case of T. canis , a higher prevalence (12.5%) was found compared to previous studies in the same area where 6.2% was found [ 15 ]. T. canis mainly affects puppies with frequently fatal consequences.…”

“…The high variation observed has been associated with various weather conditions, idiosyncrasies, and sanitary control of dogs. A previous study in the same community was performed four years ago and prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites in dogs was 80% with a high egg output of A. caninum , T. canis , and T. vulpis found; in this study, deworming of dogs was performed and talks to children, adolescents, and adults about health management of dogs were given [ 15 ]. These actions could explain the lower prevalence and intensity of infection reported at this time categorized between low and medium intensity of infection.…”

Prevalence and risk factors of Giardia spp. from free living and owned dogs in Tunja-Boyacá, Colombia

“…This similarity could possibly be attributed to high population density (Uehlinger et al, 2013) and the exposure of stray and owned dogs to common factors including poor hygiene, lack of access to clean water, or environmental contamination (Campbell et al, 2016). Previous studies have demonstrated that soil contamination in gardens and public grounds by infectious parasites significantly increases the risk of infection (Rodríguez-Vivas, 2011). Giardia spp.…”

“…Hair condition (P=0.11, P=0.88, OR=1.1) and body condition (P=0.49, P=0.66, OR=1.2) were not significantly associated with prevalence of Giardia spp. infection, despite the known negative effects that parasites, in general, have over canine nutrition (Hiepe et al, 2011) and the results in other studies in which poor body condition of dogs was associated with a higher prevalence of intestinal zoonotic parasites and a higher risk of infection (Rodríguez-Vivas, 2011).…”

Canine helminthiases and associated risk factors in Kigali city, Rwanda

“…EPG of faeces were obtained by multiplying the number of eggs by a factor of 50 [29]. In order to quantify levels of infection, EPG of faeces were categorised into three groups: low (50-100), moderate (150-500) and high (≥ 550) [35]. The analysis of faecal samples resulted into a binary response variable that indicated whether a sampled dog was infected or not infected.…”