SCHISTOSOMIASIS RESEARCH PROJECT

EPI 123

FINAL ANALYSIS REPORT

ROUND ONE DATA

FAYOUM GOVERNORATE

SUBMITTED :

TO SECRETARIAT OF SRP

BY CORE TEAM

Members of The Core Team:

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Hasan Husein, PI

Prof. F. DeWolfe Miller, USA Collaborator

Dr. Medhat Kamal ElSayed, Deputy PI

Dr. Maha Talaat, Co-PI

Prof. Dr. Amal El-Badawy, Co-PI

Prepared by: Prof. Dr. Amal El-Badawy

TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION...... 1

OBJECTIVES...... 1

SAMPLE DESIGN AND SAMPLE SELECTION...... 2

DATA COLLECTION AND DATA RECORDING...... 2

DATA ANALYSIS...... 3

DROP OUT RATES...... 5

COMMENTS...... 6

RESULTS...... 7

TESTING SAMPLE VERSUS TOTAL CENSUS...... 8

OBJECTIVE EPI 1...... 10

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT IN DIFFERENT EZBAS OR SATELLITES 11

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND

GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNTBY DISTRICT...... 12

AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT 13

AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF S. haematobium AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT 15

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNT BY LEVEL OF EDUCATION...... 16

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNTBY OCCUPATION...... 17

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS TREATMENT

FOR BILHARZIASIS...... 18

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS INFECTION WITH BILHARZIASIS 19

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY BATHING IN CANAL WATER 20

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY WASHING IN CANAL WATER 21

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF USING CANAL IN WASHING 22

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY PLAYING IN CANAL WATER 23

PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF PLAYING IN CANAL WATER 24

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT IN DIFFERENT EZBAS OR SATELLITES 25

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY DISTRICT 26

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY AGE AND SEX 27

AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF S. mansoni AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT 29

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY LEVEL OF EDUCATION 30

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY OCCUPATION 31

PREVALENCE OFS. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS TREATMENT FOR BILHARZIASIS 32

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS INFECTION WITH BILHARZIASIS 32

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY BATHING IN CANAL WATER 33

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY WASHING IN CANAL WATER 34

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF

USING CANAL WATER IN WASHING...... 35

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT BY PLAYING IN CANAL WATER 36

PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF PLAYING IN CANAL WATER 37

OBJECTIVE EPI 2...... 38

ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DWELLING UNITS (HOUSES) AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO SCHISTOSOMIASIS INFECTION INSIDE THE HOUSE 39

RESULTS OF MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS USING STEPWISE METHOD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSES AND ITS RELATION TO INFECTION INSIDE THE HOUSE 41

OBJECTIVE EPI 3...... 42

DISTRIBUTION OF LIVER FIBROSIS IN THE DIFFERENT EZBAS OR SATELLITES 43

AGE SEX DISTRIBUTION OF LIVER FIBROSIS...... 40

DISTRIBUTION OF LIVER FIBROSIS ACCORDING TO HISTORY OF PREVIOUS INFECTION WITH BILHARZIASIS 45

AGE SEX DISTRIBUTION OF LIVER MORBIDITY...... 46

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

ANALYSIS REPORT FOR EPI 123

FAYOUM GOVERNORATE

INTRODUCTION

The present document reports on the findings in the data collected for the epidemiological study EPI 123 for the Fayoum Governorate. The field team was lead by Dr. M. Farid Abdel-Wahab. Other members of the field team included Drs. Eman Medhat, Gamal Esmat, Shaker Narooz, Iman Ramzy, and Yasser El-Boraey.

The report starts by a brief reminder of the objectives, sample design and data recording. It also includes a description of the direction of analysis with limitations found in the data collected. Finally; the document include the findings tabulated and organized according to the objectives.

OBJECTIVES

EPI 123 survey was designed to provide epidemiological data about schistosomiasis in Egypt that could be combined with data from other directed research to allow MOH to more effectively control schistosomiasis.

The EPI 123 survey, therefore, had three study objectives which were as follows:

I. The First Objective (EPI 1):

The first objective was to describe the changing patterns of S. haematobium and S. Mansoni infection and intensity of infection independently in each of the nine purposively selected governorates and also to identify major transmission factors that could explain these changes.

II. The Second Objective (EPI 2):

The second objective was to identify factors that explain the variation in schistosomiasis prevalence and intensity of infection among villages.

III. The Third Objective (EPI 3):

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

The third objective was to describe the public health impact of schistosomiasis morbidity. The ultrasonographic measures of morbidity were the main outcome of interest. Also to identify determinants of this morbidity.

SAMPLE DESIGN AND SAMPLE SELECTION

In brief, the sample selection; designed to achieve the above stated objectives, was a multi-stage probability sample selection. Within each governorate, villages were selected by stratified random sampling technique. Stratification of villages was made by District. Ezbas (satellites) were selected within each village by a stratified random selection process. Stratification of ezbas within villages was based on the number of houses in each ezba. Houses were selected within each ezba by a systematic random sampling techniques. Finally; all individuals living in the selected houses were recruited in the sample. Individuals living in only 20% of the selected houses were identified for ultrasound and clinical examination.

DATA COLLECTION AND DATA RECORDING

Data were collected on specially developed data forms. The forms included:

. Roster :Considered as a complete list of all individuals selected in the sample.

. House :Included environmental data about houses (and dwelling units) selected in the sample.

. Person :Included personal demographic data, history of previous infection, previous treatment and water contact behavior.

. Stool :There were three stool forms that included data about stool characteristics, schistosomiasis ova count as well as other parasitic infection.

. Urine :There were two urine forms for the collection of urine data that included the schistosomiasis ova count and dip stick findings in the urine.

. Ultrasound:Included data about ultrasound measurements for the liver, spleen and urinary system.

. Clinical :Included some clinical findings.

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

Special computer screen data forms were developed in Arabic and English languages to enter data on computers. These forms were complied in a specially developed program. Data entry used the software called EPI INFO 5.

DATA ANALYSIS

The software called Survey Data Analysis (SUDAAN) was used in the final analysis. This software has the advantage of including the probability of selection and thereby can provide estimate that are representative to the population from which the sample was drawn. It also has the advantage of adjusting for non response. The use of this software was essential because of the complexity of the sample design.

Table 1 shows the identified sample distributed by district, village and ezba. The table shows the number of households identified through the sample design in each ezba.

TABLE 1:SAMPLE SELECTED

DISTRICT / VILLAGE / EZBA / NUMBER OF SAMPLED HOUSES
ABSHAWAY / Kafr-Abboud / Kafr-Abboud / 110
El-Tamawi / 92
SENNORES / Monshaat Sennores / Abdel-Alim Ibrahim / 93
Wahdan / 87
Amin Fanous El-Bahria / 14
Mohamed Mostafa Osman / 12
EL-FAYOUM / Senofar / Senofar / 118
Mohamed Genedy / 46
El-Wabour / 5
ATSA / Khalaf Fayoum / Khalaf Fayoum / 79
Shaker / 72
Badr-Khan / 21
El-Bitar / 20
TAMIA / Sersena / Sersena / 100
Abu-Kelib / 48
Besseis Mohamed / 34
Mahgoub El-Gebali / 9
ATSA / Monshaat Seif El-Nasr / Monshaat Seifel-Nasr / 77
El-Kashaf Abdel Gelil / 62
Hafaz Hussein / 17
Abdel-Hafiz Allak / 5
TOTAL SAMPLED HOUSHOLDS / 1151

DROP OUT RATES

The sample design lead to the identification of 1151 households to be recruited. The number of households actually recruit in the sample was 1210 households. Only 90 households were either found empty or refused co-operation and these represented 7.4% household drop out. The number of individuals living in the households actually recruit were 7733 individuals. Individuals that did not respond to person interview were 550 individuals representing 7.1% person drop out. Of the 7733 individuals, only 2591 individuals did not have stool results representing 33.5% stool drop out and 2509 individuals did not have urine results representing 32.4% urine drop out. The number of individuals identified for ultrasound examination were 1584 individuals. Only 1089 individuals had ultrasound data. Accordingly the drop out rate for ultrasound examination was 31.3%. Table 2 summarizes the drop out rate for different parameters.

TABLE 2:DROP OUT RATES

ITEM / REFERENCE FOR DROP OUT CALCULATION / % DROP OUT
HOUSE / SAMPLE OF HOUSEHOLDS / 7.4%
PERSON / INDIVIDUALS IDENTIFIED TO BE LIVING THE RECRUITED HOUSEHOLDS / 7.1%
STOOL / INDIVIDUALS IDENTIFIED TO BE LIVING THE RECRUITED HOUSEHOLDS / 33.5%
URINE / INDIVIDUALS IDENTIFIED TO BE LIVING THE RECRUITED HOUSEHOLDS / 32.4%
ULTRASOUND / INDIVIDUALS SAMPLED FOR ULTRASOUND / 31.3%

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

COMMENTS

There was limited involvement by the Core design and analysis team in the implementation of the Fayoum field work and data collection phase. This constraint was placed on the Core team at the request of the Fayoum team leaders. The impacted on the study in a number of ways some of which are indicated below.

The number of households recruited was more than that identified by the sample selection. The census carried out by the field team was most probably inaccurate especially in small villages.

The number of individuals recorded to be living in each households was different in different forms (Roster, House and Person).

The drop out rates were only acceptable for house and person data. Stool, urine and ultrasonographic data had a high drop out rates reaching 33.5%, 32.4% and 31.4% respectively.

Two villages number 9 and 21 had no ultrasonographic data.

RESULTS

TESTING SAMPLE VERSUS TOTAL CENSUS

The actual sample of individuals were examined for the age and sex distribution. Age groups of five years were used. The age and sex distribution of the whole rural population was obtained from the 1986 census of the Central Agency for Population Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS). This was used as an indication for how far the sample drawn was representative of the population from which it was drawn.

Figure 1 shows the age and sex distribution of the actually sampled individuals versus the total census. The figure gives a clear idea for how far the actual sample was representative for the total rural population for the governorate. The largest differences were in the two youngest age groups. The 0 to 4 were under represented and the 5 to 9 were over represented. The large size of these two age groups must also be borne in mind.

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

FIGURE 1:TESTING SAMPLE VERSUS RURAL POPULATION

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

OBJECTIVE EPI 1

Objective EPI 123 was achieved as a description of the prevalence and intensity of infection for both S. mansoni and S. haematobium according to different parameters. First, the pattern of distribution of the type of infection and its intensity over the governorate will be presented in different ezbas (or satellites).

The burden of infection will be described in different age groups, sex, occupation, level of education and according to some water contact behavior (e.g. bathing in canals, washing clothes in canals and playing in canals).

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 3:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT IN DIFFERENT EZBAS OR SATELLITES

VILLAGE / SATELLITE / N1 / PREV.  S.E. / GMEC  S.E.
EXAMINED / % / 10ml URINE
KAFR ABBOUD / 557 / 14.52  0.35 / 6.37  0.23
EZBET EL-TAMAWI / 396 / 19.26  0.41 / 11.92  0.47
ABDEL-ALIM IBRAHIM / 552 / 20.51  0.18 / 10.26  0.14
WAHDAN / 426 / 5.13  0.05 / 5.05  0.06
AMIN FANOUS EL-BAH / 73 / 0  0 / ...
MOHAMED MOSTAFA OSMAN / 85 / 3.24  0.09 / 1.26  0.01
SENOFAR / 553 / 14.06  0.33 / 10.93  0.36
EZBET MOHAMED GENEDY / 229 / 13.61  0.23 / 8.85  0.17
EZBET EL-WABOUR / 19 / 24.82  0.41 / 8.21  0.26
KHALAF FAYOUM / 340 / 1.34  0.07 / 1.70  0.04
EZBET SHAKER / 240 / 5.45  0.12 / 3.46  0.10
EZBET EL-BITAR / 86 / 0  0 / ...
EZBET BADR-KHAN / 83 / 4.92  0.20 / 5.03  0.05
SERSENA / 439 / 6.47  0.27 / 8.21  0.83
EZBET ABOU-KELIB / 170 / 13.51  0.64 / 13.81  0.98
EZBET BESSEIS MOHAMED / 163 / 12.34  0.22 / 26.57  0.89
EZBET MAHGOUB EL-GEBALI / 141 / 26.97  0.31 / 22.53  0.59
MONSHAAT SEIF EL-NASR / 307 / 27.15  0.30 / 11.82  0.23
EZBET EL-KASHEF & ABDEL-GELIL EL-SE'EDAWY / 270 / 23.11  0.55 / 23.13  1.05
EZBET HAFEZ HUSSEIN / 70 / 20.28  0.42 / 13.17  0.23
EZBET ABDEL-HAFIZ ALAK / 25 / 20.51  0.50 / 16.81  0.78
TOTAL / 5224 / 13.69  1.40 / 9.95  1.11

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 4:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND

GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNTBY DISTRICT

DISTRICT / NUMBER EXAMINED / PREV.%  S.E. / GMEC  S.E. 10ml URINE
ABSHAWAY / 953 / 15.16  0.31 / 7.10  0.22
SENNORAS / 1136 / 14.91  1.31 / 9.43  0.29
EL-FAYOUM / 801 / 14.11  0.29 / 10.64  0.31
ATSA / 1421 / 11.46  8.95 / 13.63  7.38
TAMIA / 913 / 10.08  0.45 / 14.19  0.70
TOTAL / 5224 / 13.69  1.40 / 9.95  1.11

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 5:AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF S. haematobium IN URINE

AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT

AGE / SEX / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.
% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
0-4TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 645
348
297 / 8.16  1.73
6.56  2.87
9.91  2.58 / 15.24  3.64
14.06  3.90
16.17  4.41
5-9TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 1097
584
513 / 18.61  2.58
19.01  2.97
18.14  3.37 / 12.37  2.38
13.71  3.23
10.93  2.20
10-14 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 807
419
388 / 24.20  2.16
27.15  2.22
20.90  2.77 / 10.42  0.69
11.66  1.00
8.85  0.85
15-19 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 519
288
231 / 18.94  2.47
21.47  3.13
15.29  2.97 / 10.27  2.28
10.43  2.30
9.95  3.29
20-24 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 349
142
207 / 17.77  1.05
23.15  2.36
11.15  2.94 / 9.26  2.05
11.97  2.81
4.79  1.22
25-29 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 337
131
206 / 10.28  0.84
12.14  1.65
8.52  1.05 / 5.21  2.32
4.70  2.03
6.00  3.40
30-34 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 260
110
150 / 7.60  3.13
12.19  5.86
2.12  1.20 / 17.98  6.72
25.60  5.29
1.59  0.31
35-39 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 263
102
161 / 5.74  1.44
8.51  4.06
3.24  1.45 / 4.03  1.46
4.69  1.86
2.81  1.02
40-44 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 208
106
102 / 11.16  2.23
13.81  1.44
7.38  4.04 / 3.63  0.95
3.70  1.18
3.45  2.11
45-49 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 165
72
93 / 3.49  1.76
6.57  3.29
0.60  0.68 / 2.96  1.56
2.66  1.32
8.74  0.22
50-54 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 164
65
99 / 8.73  2.39
10.68  4.59
7.16  1.05 / 5.16  1.21
8.97  7.35
2.65  1.24
55-59 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 125
67
58 / 3.33  1.84
5.88  3.29
0.21  0.24 / 8.86  2.63
9.15  2.68
3.00  0
60-64 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 127
50
77 / 7.50  1.66
7.67  5.06
7.36  2.74 / 10.03  2.54
6.10  0.89
12.61  2.92
65-69 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 51
27
24 / 3.66  3.40
6.29  5.21
1.31  1.34 / 1.00  0
1.00  0
1.00  0
70 + TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 107
52
55 / 1.37  0.68
2.41  1.46
0.53  0.58 / 1.00  0
1.00  0
1.00  0
TOTAL / 5224 / 13.69  1.40 / 9.95  1.11
MALE / 2563 / 15.75  1.71 / 10.67  1.49
FEMALE / 2661 / 11.38  1.91 / 8.94  0.99

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

FIGURE 2: AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF S. haematobium AND GEOMETRIC MEAN EGG COUNT

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 6:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNT BY LEVEL OF EDUCATION

LEVEL OF EDUCATION / N1 EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.
% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
PRIMARY / 963 / 14.57  2.07 / 8.62  1.74
PREPARATORY & SECONDARY / 478 / 12.77  2.53 / 8.49  1.33
UNIVERSITY / 20 / 7.92  7.02 / 1.38  0.54
BELOW AGE / 1010 / 11.18  1.92 / 12.77  3.38
DIDN'T VISITSCHOOL / 2646 / 15.03  1.89 / 10.10  1.72
TOTAL / 5117 / 13.92  1.38 / 9.93  1.11

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 7: PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNTBY OCCUPATION

OCCUPATION / N1 EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.
% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
FARMER / 686 / 18.78  2.19 / 8.18  1.41
FARMING LABORER / 30 / 22.62  16.76 / 3.98  0.49
SKILLED LABORER / 24 / 22.46  5.82 / 6.86  3.57
HOUSEWIFE / 1319 / 8.10  1.99 / 6.66  0.57
PROFESSIONAL / 28 / 0  0 / ...
CLERK / 19 / 10.10  5.56 / 3.81  4.61
STUDENT / 887 / 15.17  2.34 / 9.23  1.47
LABORER / 49 / 20.10  1.80 / 3.12  0.34
ORZOKI / 63 / 16.58  3.27 / 28.26  8.41
MERCHANT / 11 / 7.65  8.45 / 18.00  0
MEKAWEL / 2 / 30.31  29.70 / 3.00  0
FISHERMEN / 4 / 0  0 / ...
OTHER JOB / 106 / 8.36  5.53 / 45.78  23.51
NOT WORKING / 250 / 17.57  2.90 / 22.01  6.45
NOT APPLIED / 1639 / 15.23  2.09 / 11.88  1.1
TOTAL / 5117 / 13.92  1.38 / 9.93  1.11

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 8:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC

MEAN EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS TREATMENT

FOR BILHARZIASIS

WERE YOU TREATED FOR SCHISTO BEFORE ? / N1 EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.
% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
YES / 973 / 15.97  2.06 / 9.08  2
NO / 4051 / 13.58  1.55 / 10.27  1.24
DON'T KNOW / 90 / 6.54  2.39 / 5.75  2.88
TOTAL / 5114 / 13.93  1.38 / 9.95  1.09

TABLE 9:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY HISTORY OF PREVIOUS INFECTION WITH

BILHARZIASIS

DID YOU GET SCHISTO BEFORE ? / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E. % / GMEC  S.E
10ml URINE
YES / 994 / 15.83  1.98 / 9.39  1.97
NO / 2470 / 14.45  1.81 / 10.15  2.16
DON'T KNOW / 1650 / 11.87  1.71 / 10.05  1.22
TOTAL / 5114 / 13.92  1.38 / 9.95  1.09

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 10:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY BATHING IN CANAL WATER

LAST TIME TO BATH IN CANAL / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.
% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
NO / 3413 / 11.98  1.46 / 9.65  1.36
< 1 WEEK / 325 / 18.67  4.01 / 11.20  4.29
1-4 WEEKS / 169 / 18.77  4.11 / 5.83  2.66
1-12 MONTHS / 520 / 23.70  2.97 / 12.88  1.63
1 YEAR AND MORE / 660 / 13.29  1.68 / 9.10  1.11
DON'T REMEMBER / 2 / 0  0 / ...
OTHER / 25 / 10.15  0.94 / 2.96  0.30
NOT APPLIED / 2 / 0  0 / ...
TOTAL / 5116 / 13.93  1.38 / 9.94  1.09

TABLE 11:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY WASHING IN CANAL WATER

LAST TIME TO WASH CLOTHES IN CANAL / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E. % / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
NO / 3567 / 14.56  1.50 / 10.60  1.11
< 1 WEEK / 835 / 16.18  1.99 / 9.79  2.60
1-4 WEEKS / 204 / 9  2.28 / 5.70  0.93
1-12 MONTHS / 186 / 14.26  1.47 / 6.26  1.94
1 YEAR AND MORE / 307 / 5.03  1.29 / 5.81  1.47
DON'T REMEMBER / 0 / ... / ...
OTHER / 7 / 28.60  2.40 / 4.22  0.77
NOT APPLIED / 1 / 0  0 / ...
TOTAL / 5107 / 13.93  1.38 / 9.95  1.09

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 12:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF USING CANAL IN

WASHING

DO YOU ALWAYS USE CANAL IN WASHING ? / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
ALWAYS / 545 / 14.55  2.82 / 6.58  1.47
SOMETIMES / 784 / 12.11  1.35 / 8.70  0.77
RARELY / 167 / 4.80  1.13 / 4.77  1.71
NEVER / 1 / 0  0 / ...
TOTAL / 1497 / 11.93  1.58 / 7.56  1.09

TABLE 13:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY PLAYING IN CANAL WATER

LAST TIME TO PLAY IN CANAL / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E.% / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
NO / 3937 / 12.77  1.40 / 8.83  1.01
< 1 WEEK / 818 / 17.96  2.25 / 11.98  2.91
1-4 WEEKS / 148 / 18.76  6.72 / 14.63  9.37
1-12 MONTHS / 160 / 23.68  4.57 / 20.07  6.10
1 YEAR AND MORE / 34 / 3.74  3.13 / 5  0
DON'T REMEMBER / 1 / 0  0 / ...
OTHER / 10 / 5.75  0.96 / 2  0
NOT APPLIED / 0 / ... / ...
TOTAL / 5108 / 13.92  1.38 / 9.93  1.1

TABLE 14:PREVALENCE OF S. haematobium IN URINE AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF PLAYING IN CANAL

WATER

DO YOU ALWAYS PLAY IN CANAL? / N1
EXAMINED / PREV.  S.E. % / GMEC  S.E.
10ml URINE
ALWAYS / 462 / 20.97  3.27 / 14.79  2.31
SOMETIMES / 608 / 17.53  2.50 / 14.24  2.04
RARELY / 62 / 12.49  2.23 / 5.94  0.61
NEVER / 0 / ... / ...
TOTAL / 1132 / 18.44  2.62 / 13.91  1.89

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 15:PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT IN DIFFERENT EZBAS OR SATELLITES

VILLAGE / SATELLITE / N1 / PREV.  S.E. / GMEC  S.E.
EXAMINED / % / /gm STOOL
KAFR ABBOUD / 542 / 1.06  0.10 / 24.40  1.94
EZBET EL-TAMAWI / 386 / 0  0 / ...
ABDEL-ALIM IBRAHIM / 569 / 8.85  0.12 / 40.33  0.63
WAHDAN / 423 / 0.30  0.01 / 12.00  0
AMIN FANOUS EL-BAH / 68 / 0  0 / ...
MOHAMED MOSTAFA OSMAN / 86 / 1.02  0 / ...
SENOFAR / 555 / 0.17  0.03 / 24.00  0
EZBET MOHAMED GENEDY / 235 / 0  0 / ...
EZBET EL-WABOUR / 18 / 0  0 / ...
KHALAF FAYOUM / 351 / 25.70  0.29 / 62.39  1.00
EZBET SHAKER / 246 / 34.30  0.27 / 48.65  0.45
EZBET EL-BITAR / 90 / 30.79  0.37 / 47.13  0.88
EZBET BADR-KHAN / 80 / 28.33  0.37 / 34.71  0.52
SERSENA / 425 / 0.22  0.06 / 72.00  0
EZBET ABOU-KELIB / 140 / 0.91  0.21 / 36.00  0
EZBET BESSEIS MOHAMED / 144 / 0  0 / ...
EZBET MAHGOUB EL-GEBALI / 132 / 0  0 / ...
MONSHAAT SEIF EL-NASR / 301 / 0  0 / ...
EZBET EL-KASHEF & ABDEL-GELIL EL-SE'EDAWY / 261 / 0.50  0.08 / 12.00  0
EZBET HAFEZ HUSSEIN / 65 / 0  0 / ...
EZBET ABDEL-HAFIZ ALAK / 25 / 4.08  0.20 / 24.00  0
TOTAL / 5142 / 4.33  2.70 / 44.00  4.02

TABLE 16:PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY DISTRICT

DISTRICT / NUMBER EXAMINED / PREV.%  S.E. / GMEC  S.E. /gm STOOL
ABSHAWAY / 928 / 0.91  0.09 / 24.40  1.94
SENNORAS / 1146 / 6.01  0.71 / 39.72  0.67
EL-FAYOUM / 808 / 0.15  0.03 / 24.00  0
ATSA / 1419 / 19.28  13.96 / 49.62  1.51
TAMIA / 841 / 0.21  0.04 / 61.48  2.62
TOTAL / 5142 / 4.33  2.70 / 44.00  4.02

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1

TABLE 17:PREVALENCE OF S. mansoni IN STOOL AND GEOMETRIC MEAN

EGG COUNT BY AGE AND SEX

AGE / SEX / N1 / PREV.  S.E. / GMEC  S.E.
EXAMINED / % / /gm STOOL
0-4TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 674
352
322 / 2.81  2.38
1.77  1.86
3.95  2.99 / 37.47  5.25
34.58  4.06
38.98  8.85
5-9TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 1068
571
497 / 6.58  4.68
8.78  6.17
4.03  3.03 / 43.65  8.55
44.78  10.85
40.93  4.00
10-14 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 804
420
384 / 7.49  4.88
11.93  7.58
2.52  1.85 / 75.19  9.97
86.78  9.93
39.49  17.21
15-19 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 512
282
230 / 5.11  3.44
7.84  5.24
1.19  0.81 / 27.33  5.73
29.13  6.12
14.90  2.53
20-24 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 330
137
193 / 2.10  1.37
3.80  2.55
0  0 / 37.88  4.16
37.88  4.16
...
25-29 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 332
131
201 / 4.90  2.02
8.00  3.27
1.97  0.94 / 40.72  9.68
42.20  14.02
35.49  8.92
30-34 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 252
110
142 / 2.07  1.20
2.12  1.25
2.00  1.20 / 59.07  25.51
174.06  133.07
14.96  2.66
35-39 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 259
100
159 / 3.59  1.83
5.67  2.75
1.71  1.05 / 28.90  4.39
26.58  6.09
37.12  7.54
40-44 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 198
107
91 / 2.16  1.25
3.36  1.91
0.44  0.45 / 29.50  5.28
30.07  6.26
24.00  0
45-49 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 164
69
95 / 1.86  1.31
2.24  2.19
1.51  1.39 / 44.07  16.87
68.21  15.71
24.00  0
50-54 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 161
65
96 / 1.34  1.50
2.57  2.85
0.36  0.41 / 53.14  2.90
48.00  1.97
96.00  0
55-59 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 120
64
56 / 5.66  2.51
9.66  4.14
0.76  0.81 / 32.06  3.03
34.15  4.96
12.00  0
60-64 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 121
50
71 / 3.35  1.72
6.98  3.32
0.53  0.55 / 33.72  21.39
37.30  22.97
12.00  0
65-69 TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 49
25
24 / 2.76  2.93
5.85  6.25
0  0 / 19.43  0.97
19.43  0.97
...
70+ TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE / 98
49
49 / 0  0
0  0
0  0 / ...
...
...
TOTAL
TOTAL / 5142 / 4.33  2.70 / 44.00  4.02
MALE / 2532 / 6.21  3.75 / 47.43  4.55
FEMALE / 2610 / 2.23  1.56 / 35.05  7.11

Analysis Report Fayoum Gov 1