Environmental Hygiene and Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Beyene

et al. 2019

Preprint

20 Background: Intestinal parasitic infection affects 3.5 billion people in the world and mostly 21 affecting the low socio-economic groups. The objectives of this research were to estimate the 22 prevalence and determinants of intestinal parasitic infection among family members of known 23 intestinal parasite infected patients. 24 Methods and materials: A comparative cross-sectional study design was implemented in the 25 urban and rural settings of mecha district. The data were collected from August 2017 to March 26 2019 from intestinal parasitic infected patient household members. Epi-info software was used to 27 calculate the sample size, 4531 household members were estimated to be included. Data were 28 collected using interview technique and colleting stool samples from each household contact of 29 intestinal parasite patients. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence of 30 intestinal parasites among known contacts of intestinal parasites patients/family members. 31 Binary logistic regression was used to identify the determinant factors of intestinal parasitic 32 infection among family members. 33 Results: The prevalence of intestinal parasite among household contacts of parasite-infected 34 family members was 86.14 % [95% CI: 86.14 % -87.15 %]. Hookworm parasitic infection was 35 the predominant type of infection (18.8%). Intestinal parasitic infection was associated with sex, 36 environmental sanitation, source of water, habit of playing with domestic animals, the presence 37 of chicken in the house, the presence of household water filtering materials, overcrowding, 38 personal hygiene, residence, and substandard house, role in the household, source of light for the 39 house, floor materials, trimmed fingernails, family size, regular hand washing practice, barefoot. 3 40 Conclusion: The prevalence of intestinal parasites was high among household contacts of 41 primary confirmed cases. 42 Key words: intestinal parasite, contact screening, secondary attack rate, household members. 43 Introduction 44 Intestinal parasites are groups of worm's primary affecting the gastrointestinal tracts broadly 45 contains flatworms (tapeworms and flukes) and roundworms( ascariasis, pinworm, and 46 hookworm infections)[1]. The mode of transmission includes ingestion of uncooked animal 47 products, consuming infected water, absorption through the skin and fecal-oral [2]. 48 Predominantly intestinal parasitic infection transmitted through feco-oral route [3]. That means 49 all family members living in intestinal positive patients at higher risk of acquiring the infection. 50 A patient infected with intestinal parasite manifests with abdominal cramp, vomiting, excessive 51 bowl sound, nausea, diarrhea, loss of appetite, malabsorption, skin itching [4]. Due to 52 unspecified symptoms, the diagnosis of intestinal parasitic infection usually performed by taking 53 stool samples and applying different laboratory techniques, concentration technique is more 54 valid than the other laboratory techniques [5]. 55 Intes...

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Intestinal parasitic infection among household contacts of primary cases, a comparative cross-sectional study

Beyene

et al. 2019

Preprint

“…Personal hygiene decreases the odds of intestinal parasitic infection by 74% among children, and by 96% lower in adults. This finding agrees with systematic review report [32]. This is because personal hygiene breaks the chain of intestinal parasitic transmission cycle [33].…”

Section: Intestinal Parasitic Infection Among Childrensupporting

confidence: 92%

Intestinal parasitic infection among household contacts of primary cases, a comparative cross-sectional study

Beyene

Feleke³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

Background Intestinal parasitic infection affects 3.5 billion people in the world and mostly affecting the low socioeconomic groups. The objectives of this research works were to estimate the prevalence and determinants of intestinal parasitic infection among family members of known intestinal parasite infected patients. Methods and materials A comparative cross-sectional study design was implemented in the urban and rural settings of Mecha district. The data were collected from August 2017toMarch 2019 from intestinal parasite infected patient household members. Epi-info software was used to calculate the sample size, 4531 household members were estimated to be included. Data were collected using interview technique, and collecting stool samples from each household contact of intestinal parasite patients. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence of intestinal parasites among known contacts of intestinal parasite patients/family members. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the determinant factors of intestinal parasitic infection among family members. Results The prevalence of intestinal parasite among household contacts of intestinal parasiteinfected family members was 86.14% [95% CI: 86.14%-87.15%]. Hookworm infection was the predominant type of infection (18.8%). Intestinal parasitic infection was associated with sex, environmental sanitation, overcrowding, personal hygiene, residence, substandard house, role in the household, source of light for the house, trimmed fingernails, family size, regular handwashing practice. Protozoa infection was associated with habit of ingesting raw vegetable, playing with domestic animals, water source and the presence of household water filtering materials.

J of Gastro and Hepatol

“…In a meta-analysis, contact with pet and farm animals during childhood was inversely associated with the risk of developing IBD in both East and West, although the association was strongest in the West (OR 0.27 and OR 0.55; P = 0.028). 58,69 However, the robustness of the association remains to be tested as contradictory findings have also been reported in the Asian population, where access to flushing toilet (adjusted OR 0.71) and hot water (adjusted OR 0.65) were associated with a decreased risk of developing UC. 58 Reduced exposure to pathogenic bacteria has also been suggested to influence the risk of IBD.…”

Section: Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors For Ibd In East Vsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease: East meets west

Mak

Zhao

et al. 2019

448

291

The incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in East has risen over the past decade to become a global disease. The increasing number of studies on the incidence and course of IBD in East has enabled us to explore East versus West differences in the epidemiology of IBD which could enhance our understanding of the heterogeneity of the disease and eventually assist in the discovery of novel therapeutic targets and design of preventive strategies. Comparison of population‐based data in East and West reveals that the incidence of IBD has risen rapidly in East while plateauing in West. Furthermore, the clinical presentation and course of IBD differs between East and West with more patients in East presenting with complicated disease. Considering the scarcity of population‐based data from East and the lack of studies with long durations of follow‐up, it remains to be clarified whether these differences reflect true differences in disease presentation. The effects of genetic and environmental risk factors contributing to IBD also differ between Eastern and Western populations. Considering the differential effects of genetic and environmental risk factors in East and West, future studies should seek to discover novel genetic and environmental risk factors which might specifically apply to eastern populations. In this narrative review, we compare the epidemiology of IBD between eastern and western countries by summarizing evidence from population‐based cohort studies in the last ten years. Furthermore, we look at differences in genetic susceptibility and environmental triggers of IBD between East and West.