热带病与寄生虫学

热带病与寄生虫学 ›› 2022, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (5): 257-259,263.

• 防治研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

2018—2019年石台县野外灭鼠控制血吸虫病传染源效果观察

何家昶1，陶伟2，汪天平1，高风华1，陈雪峰2，许晓娟1，代波1，丁宋军1，刘婷1，李异3，汪昊1，茅维飞3，章乐生1，张世清1
  

  1. 1. 安徽省血吸虫病防治研究所，安徽合肥230601； 2. 石台县疾病预防控制中心； 3. 池州市疾病预防控制保健中心
  • 收稿日期:2022-02-24 出版日期:2022-10-20 发布日期:2022-11-16
  • 作者简介:何家昶，男，硕士，主任医师，研究方向：血吸虫病防治。E-mail：hejiachang2005@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    安徽省医疗卫生重点专科建设项目

Preliminary observation on the efficacy to check infection source of schistosomiasis by controlling wild rodents

HE Jia-chang1, TAO Wei2, WANG Tian-ping1, GAO Feng-hua1, CHEN Xue-feng2, XU Xiao-juan1, Dai Bo1, DING Song-jun1, LIU Ting1, LI Yi3, WANG Hao1, MAO Wei-fei3, ZHANG Le-sheng1, ZHANG Shi-qing1   

  1. 1. Anhui Institute of Schistosomiasis Control，Hefei 230601, Anhui Province, China; 2. Shitai County Center for Disease Control and Prevention;  3. Chizhou City Center for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Received:2022-02-24 Online:2022-10-20 Published:2022-11-16

PDF (PC)

511

摘要： 目的 观察在以野鼠作为主要传染源的血吸虫病流行区，通过野外灭鼠配合常规防治措施控制血吸虫病动物传染源的效果。方法 在石台县选择3个血吸虫病流行村，其中试验村（矶滩村和石泉村）采取常规防治措施结合野外灭鼠措施（1次），对照村（西柏村）仅采取常规防治措施，一年后评估野鼠密度及其血吸虫感染情况。结果 试验村矶滩村灭鼠前后野鼠密度分别为9.91%（75/757）、4.99%（34/681），差异有统计学意义（χ2=12.362，P<0.05）；石泉村灭鼠前后野鼠密度分别为5.31%（32/623）、3.28%（17/519），差异无统计学意义（χ2=2.756，P>0.05）；对照村西柏村防治前后野鼠密度分别为3.44%（20/582）、4.45%（21/472），差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.715，P>0.05）。试验村矶滩村灭鼠前后野鼠感染率分别为36.00%（27/75）、17.65%（6/34），石泉村灭鼠前后野鼠感染率分别为18.75%（6/32）、11.76%（2/17），对照村西柏村防治前后野鼠感染率分别为5.00%（1/20）、14.29%（3/21），3个村干预前后感染率差异均无统计学意义（χ2=2.756、0.050、0.226，P均>0.05）。结论 在以野鼠为主要传染源的血吸虫病流行区，野外灭鼠对于短期内降低野鼠密度以及血吸虫病传播风险具有一定可行性，但效果还需要进一步评估。

关键词: 血吸虫病, 传染源控制, 野鼠, 效果观察, 石台县

Abstract: Objective  To observe the effect of field deratization combined with routine control measures to check the source of schistosomiasis in areas where wild rats are the main source of infection. Methods  Three endemic villages of schistosomiasis were selected in Shitai County. Among them, the experimental village (Jitan Village and Shiquan Village) underwent routine control measures in combination with field deratization once, and the control village (Xibai Village) only received routine control measures. After one year, the density of wild rats and schistosomiasis infection were evaluated. Results  The density of rats before and after deratization was 9.91% (75/757) and 4.99% (34/681) in Jitan Village, and 5.31% (32/623) and 3.28% (17/519) in Shiquan Village, respectively (χ2=12.362, P<0.001; χ2=2.756，P>0.05). The density of rats before and after control in Xibai Village (the control village) was 3.44% (20/582) and 4.45% (21/472), respectively. The difference was insignificant (χ2=0.715, P>0.05). The infection rate of wild rats before and after deratization was 36.00% (27/75) and 17.65% (6/34) in Jitan Village(the experimental village), 18.75% (6/32) and 11.76% (2/17) in Shiquan Village, 5.00% (1/20) and 14.29% (3/21) in Xibai Village, respectively. There was no significant difference in infection rates before and after intervention among the three villages (χ2=2.756, 0.050, 0.226, all P>0.05). Conclusion  In schistosomiasis endemic areas where wild rats are the main source of infection, field deratization is feasible to reduce the density of wild rats and the risk of schistosomiasis transmission in a short period of time, but the effect needs to be further evaluated.

Key words: Schistosomiasis, Infection source control, Wild rodents, Effect evaluation, Shitai County

中图分类号: