Table 2.
Infection prevalence by village in 2009 and in a subset of villages in 2000 and 2002 surveys
| Administrative village | Natural village | Examined | Hatch positive | Prevalence of infection (%) | Prevalence of infection in 2002 (%) | Prevalence of infection in 2000 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 163 | 10 | 6.1 | ||
| 1 | 2 | 153 | 5 | 3.3 | ||
| 1 | 3 | 110 | 3 | 2.7 | ||
| 1 | 4 | 115 | 9 | 7.8 | ||
| 1 | 5 | 91 | 11 | 12 | ||
| 1 | 6 | 115 | 8 | 7.0 | 32 | 65 |
| 1 | 7 | 73 | 5 | 6.8 | ||
| 1 | 8 | 53 | 5 | 9.4 | ||
| 1 | 9 | 90 | 4 | 4.4 | ||
| 1 | 10 | 71 | 12 | 17 | ||
| 1 | 11 | 60 | 6 | 10 | ||
| 1 | 12 | 94 | 6 | 6.4 | ||
| 1 | 13 | 79 | 13 | 16 | ||
| Village 1 total | 1,267 | 97 | 7.7 | |||
| 2 | 1 | 43 | 2 | 4.7 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 108 | 1 | 0.9 | ||
| 2 | 3 | 89 | 1 | 1.1 | ||
| 2 | 4 | 103 | 2 | 1.9 | ||
| 2 | 5 | 85 | 4 | 4.7 | 28 | 68 |
| 2 | 6 | 118 | 8 | 6.8 | ||
| 2 | 7 | 98 | 3 | 3.1 | ||
| 2 | 8 | 159 | 0 | 0.0 | ||
| 2 | 9 | 47 | 0 | 0.0 | ||
| 2 | 10 | 50 | 2 | 4.0 | ||
| Village 2 total | 900 | 23 | 2.6 | |||
| 3 | 1 | 94 | 2 | 2.1 | ||
| 3 | 2 | 140 | 4 | 2.9 | ||
| 3 | 3 | 164 | 11 | 6.7 | 23 | 44 |
| 3 | 4 | 149 | 8 | 5.4 | ||
| 3 | 5 | 103 | 7 | 6.8 | ||
| 3 | 6 | 105 | 9 | 8.6 | ||
| 3 | 7 | 123 | 8 | 6.5 | 38 | 73 |
| 3 | 9 | 56 | 3 | 5.4 | ||
| 3 | 10 | 74 | 1 | 1.4 | ||
| 3 | 11 | 94 | 12 | 13 | ||
| Village 3 total | 1,102 | 65 | 5.9 | |||
| Total | 3,269 | 185 | 5.7 |
Difference between years was significant (Fisher's exact test; P < 0.001).