Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-7jkgd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-18T10:53:52.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bancroftian filariasis in Pondicherry, South India: 1. Pre-control epidemiological observations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

P. K. Rajagopalan ,
P. K. Das ,
S. Subramanian ,
P. Vanamail  and
K. D. Ramaiah
P. K. Rajagopalan
Affiliation:
Vector Control Research Centre (Indian Council of Medical Research), Indira Nagar, Pondicherry—605 006, India
P. K. Das
Affiliation:
Vector Control Research Centre (Indian Council of Medical Research), Indira Nagar, Pondicherry—605 006, India
S. Subramanian
Affiliation:
Vector Control Research Centre (Indian Council of Medical Research), Indira Nagar, Pondicherry—605 006, India
P. Vanamail
Affiliation:
Vector Control Research Centre (Indian Council of Medical Research), Indira Nagar, Pondicherry—605 006, India
K. D. Ramaiah
Affiliation:
Vector Control Research Centre (Indian Council of Medical Research), Indira Nagar, Pondicherry—605 006, India
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A 5-year Integrated Vector Management (IVM) project was implemented in Pondicherry, South India, for the control of Bancroftian filariasis. The efficacy of the IVM strategy was compared with routine control strategy under the national programme. The present paper describes the pre-control epidemiological features of filariasis as determined by a mass blood survey in 1981. Of 24946 persons examined 8·41%; were microfilaraemic. Microfilaraemia prevalence was homogeneous throughout the study area. The prevalence and intensity of microfilaraemia were age dependent, and increased monotonically until about 20 years, following which there was a decline until about 40 years to become relatively stable in older age classes. The gender profiles of both prevalence and intensity of microfilaraemia showed no difference between the sexes until about 15 years of age, following which both were higher in males compared to females. The distribution of microfilarial counts was overdispersed, indicating aggregation of adult worms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 103 , Issue 3 , December 1989 , pp. 685 - 692
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

REFERENCES

1.Sasa, M.Human filariasis: a global survey of epidemiology and control. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1976: 663–734.Google Scholar
2.Sharma, SP, Biswas, H, Das, M, Dwivedi, SR.Present status of filariasis problem in India. J Commun Dis 1983; 15: 53–60.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Rao, CK and Sharma, SP.Control of filariasis in India. J Commun Dis 1986; 18: 276–82.Google Scholar
4.Rajagopalan, PK, Das, PK.The Pondicherry Project on integrated disease vector control. (Filariasis Control Demonstration Project): Vector Control Research Centre, Pondicherry, 1987; 1–164.Google Scholar
5.Rajagopalan, PK, Panicker, KN, Das, PK.Control of malaria and filariasis vectors in South India. Parasitology Today 1987; 3: 233–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Rajagopalan, PK, Das, PK. Environmental Control of filariasis in Pondicherry. In: Krishnamoorthy, CR, ed. Facets of environmental problems. New Delhi: National Committee of SCOPE, Indian National Science Academy, 1984: 21–34.Google Scholar
7.Rajagopalan, PK, Das, PK.Integrated vector management for urban filariasis control in Pondicherry, New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research, 1985; Indian Council of Medical Research Bulletin: 15: 133–40.Google Scholar
8.Rajagopalan, PK, Das, PK. Filariasis control by integrated vector management. In: Proceedings of the ICMR/WHO Workshop to review research results on community participation for disease vector control. New Delhi: Malaria Research Centre, 1986: 85–99.Google Scholar
9.Desowitz, RS, Southgate, BA.Studies on filariasis in the pacific. 2. The persistence of microfilaraemia in diethylcarbamazine treated populations of Fiji and Western Samoa: Diagnostic application of the membrane filter technique. Southeast Asian J Med Public Health 1973; 4: 179–83.Google Scholar
10.Bliss, CA, Fisher, RA.Fitting of the negative binomial distribution to biological data and a note on the efficient fitting of the negative binomial. Biometrics 1953; 9: 176–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Wyshak, G.A program for estimating the parameters of the truncated negative binomial distribution. Appl Stat 1974; 23: 87–91.Google Scholar
12.Gubler, DJ, Bhattacharya, NC.A quantitative approach to the study of bancroftian filariasis: WHO/VBC 1974; 492.Google Scholar
13.Rao, CK, Datta, KK, Sundaram, RM et al. Epidemiological studies on bancroftian filariasis in East Godavari district (Andhra Pradesh): Baseline filariometric indices. Indian J Med Res 1980; 71: 712–20.Google Scholar
14.Anderson, RM, May, RM.Population dynamics of human helminth infections: control by chemotherapy. Nature 1982; 297: 557–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Jachowski, LA, Otto, GF, Wharton, JD.Filariasis in American Samoa. I. Loss of microfilaria in the absence of continued reinfection. In: Proceedings of the Helminth Society of Washington 1951; 18: 25–8.Google Scholar
16.Conn, HC, Greenslit, FS.Filariasis residuals in veterans with report of a case of microfilaraemia. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1952; 1: 474–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Hairston, NG, Jachowski, LA.Analysis of the W. bancrofti population in people of American Samoa. B WHO 1968; 38: 29–59.Google Scholar
18.Leeuwtin, RS.Microfilaraemia in Surinamese living in Amsterdam. Trop Geogr Med 1962; 14: 355–60.Google Scholar
19.Mahoney, LE, Aiu, R.Filariasis in Samoan immigrants to the United States. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1970; 19: 629–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Manson-Bahr, P.The story of Filaria bancrofti: Part V. Description of W. bancrofti and pathology of filariasis. J Trop Med Hyg 1959; 62: 160–73.Google Scholar
21.Nelson, GS.The pathology of filarial infection. Helm Abstracts 1966; 35: 311–36.Google Scholar
22.Anderson, RM, May, RM. Helminth infections of humans: mathematical models, population dynamics and control. In: Advances in parasitology. London: Academic Press. 1985; 1–101. Baker, JR, Muller, R. eds. vol. 24.Google Scholar
23.Beye, HK, Gurian, J.Epidemiology and dynamics of transmission of Wuchereria bancrofti and Brugia malayi. Indian J Malariol 1960; 14: 415–40.Google Scholar
24.Sasa, M, Kanda, T, Mitsui, G, Shirasaka, A, Ishi, A, Chinzei, H. The filariasis control programs in Japan and their evaluation by means of epidemiological analysis of microfilaria survey data. In: Recent advances in research on filariasis and schistosomiasis in Japan. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press 1970: 1–3.Google Scholar
25.Bundy, DAP.The epidemiology of Trichuris and Trichuriasis in Caribbean communities. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1986; 80: 706–18.Google Scholar
26.Croll, NA, Anderson, RM, Gyorkos, TW, Ghadirian, E.The population biology and control of 1Ascaris lumbricoides in a rural community in Iran. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1982; 76: 87–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Li, SY, Hsu, HF.On the frequency distribution of parasitic helminths in their naturally infected hosts. Parasitology 1951; 37: 32–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Wong, MS, Bundy, DAP.Population distribution of Ochoterenella digiticauda (Nematoda: Ocnchocercidae) and Mesocoelium monas (Digenea: Brachycoeliidae) in naturally infected Bufo marinus (Amphibia: Bufonidae) from Jamaica. Parasitology 1985; 90: 457–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Park Chai Bin. Microfilaria density distribution in the human population and its infectivity index for the mosquito population. Parasitology 1988; 92: 265–71.Google Scholar