Prevalence, intensity and associated morbidity of Schistosoma japonicum infection in the Dongting Lake region, China
Julie Balen, Zheng-Yuan Zhao, Gail M Williams, Donald P McManus, Giovanna Raso, Jürg Utzinger, Jie Zhou, Yue-Sheng Li
Volume 85, Number 7, July 2007, 519-526
Table 2. Bivariate models showing the relationship of Schistosoma japonicum infection status (logistic regression), and infection intensity (negative binomial regression), with demographic descriptors, self-reported morbidity indicators and clinical disease among 3893 study participants from the 2004 PES in four villages in the lake embankment endemic setting, Dongting Lake region
| S. japonicum infection status |
S. japonicum infection intensity (epg) |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEA-ELISA |
Combined SEA-ELISA plus Kato-Katz |
|||||||
| Variable | N | Adjusted OR(95% CI) | P-value* | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | P-value* | Adjusted IRR (95% CI) | P-value* | |
| Sex | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.003 | |||||
| Female | 1810 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Male | 2083 | 2.59 (2.10–3.20) | 3.04 (1.88–4.90) | 3.87 (1.70–8.85) | ||||
| Age category (in years) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||||
| 0–19 | 1056 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| 20–39 | 1205 | 3.94 (2.71–5.72) | 2.67 (1.30–5.49) | 1.42 (0.98–3.30) | ||||
| 40–59 | 1369 | 6.08 (2.24–8.72) | 3.64 (1.83–7.24) | 1.99 (0.56–2.86) | ||||
| ⩾60 | 263 | 8.38 (5.39–13.00) | 4.57 (1.92-10.87) | 1.79 (0.68–2.99) | ||||
| Village | < 0.001 | 0.002 | < 0.001 | |||||
| Gaoqi | 962 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Lianhe | 984 | 3.94 (2.95–5.26) | 3.72 (1.79–5.75) | 3.64 (2.08–5.23) | ||||
| Qixin | 930 | 0.03 (0.01–0.12) | 3.94 (1.95–5.94) | 2.56 (1.05–3.67) | ||||
| Zensheng | 1017 | 3.11 (2.32–4.17) | 4.21 (1.73–6.25) | 5.10 (4.86–7.01) | ||||
| Prior treatment history | 2058 | 6.04 (4.67–7.82) | < 0.001 | 10.32 (4.99–21.34) | < 0.001 | n.s. | ||
| Abdominal pain | 243 | 1.35 (1.22–1.56) | < 0.001 | 0.20 (0.03–1.45) | 0.034 | 0.03 (0.01–1.15) | 0.001 | |
| Blood in stool | 124 | 3.36 (0.84–6.14) | < 0.001 | 2.48 (1.57–3.81) | 0.002 | 3.17 (2.88–3.98) | < 0.001 | |
| Liver tenderness | 153 | n.s. | n.s. | 6.67 (4.08–9.02) | < 0.001 | |||
| Portal vein diameter (cm) | < 0.001 | n.s. | < 0.001 | |||||
| ⩽8 | 194 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||||
| 9–10 | 916 | 4.07 (1.26–7.14) | 4.12 (1.23–6.80) | |||||
| 11–12 | 2131 | 5.11 (2.89–8.72) | 3.21 (2.85–4.48) | |||||
| 13 | 452 | 5.61 (4.86–9.98) | 5.57 (4.02–7.33) | |||||
| 14 | 180 | 7.75 (5.60–9.83) | 6.37 (4.13–8.68) | |||||
| ⩾15 | 20 | 7.00 (5.47–8.87) | 7.75 (5.69–9.13) | |||||
| Interior portal vein diameter (cm) | n.s. | n.s. | < 0.001 | |||||
| 6–8 | 1051 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 9–11 | 2429 | 4.77 (2.22–6.51) | ||||||
| ⩾12 | 413 | 6.07 (4.01–8.88) | ||||||
CI, confidence interval; epg, eggs per gram; IRR, incidence risk ratio; OR, odds ratio; SEA-ELISA, soluble egg antigen - indirect enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.n.s. signifies variables not significant in the respective bivariate model.P-values based on the likelihood ratio test.