Table 4. Logistic regression analysis of structural, social, and behavioral factors associated with prevalence of intestinal parasitic infection among inmates.
Mato Grosso do Sul, Midwest Brazil.
| Structural and social factors | Prevalence of parasitic infection(n; %) | Odds ratio* (95% CI4) | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prison facility | |||
| WP1 | 17 (16.5) | 0.031 | |
| MSP2 | 59 (57.3) | ||
| SOC3 | 27 (26.2) | ||
| WP vs. MSP | 0.83 (0.45–1.53) | 0.545 | |
| SOP vs. WP | 1.63 (0.83–3.12) | 0.156 | |
| MSP vs. SOC | 1.97 (1.19–3.25) | 0.008 | |
| Sanitation | |||
| Sewage system | 54 (52.4) | 1.03 (0.67–1.59) | 0.881 |
| Cesspool | 49 (47.6) | ||
| Inmates per cell | |||
| 1–4 | 20 (19.4) | 0.155 | |
| 5–8 | 15 (14.6) | ||
| 9–12 | 32 (31.0) | ||
| 13–16 | 17 (16.5) | ||
| >16 | 19 (18.5) | ||
| Age (years) | |||
| 18–28 | 35 (34.0) | 0.902 | |
| 29–39 | 43 (41.7) | ||
| >39 | 25 (24.3) | ||
| Time served | |||
| ≤2 months | 29 (28.2) | 0.6323 | |
| >2 months to 2 years | 40 (38.8) | ||
| >2–9 years | 32 (31.1) | ||
| ≥10 years | 2 (1.9) | ||
| Habit of washing hands | |||
| Yes | 97 (94.2) | 1.74 (0.65–4.65) | 0.271 |
| No | 6 (5.8) | ||
| Previous antiparasitic treatment† | |||
| Yes | 18 (17.5) | 10.18 (5.86–17.66) | <0.001 |
| No | 85 (82.5) | ||
| Works in vegetable garden | |||
| Yes | 58 (56.3) | 1.21 (0.78–1.85) | 0.393 |
| No | 45 (43.7) | ||
| Knows meaning of term ‘parasite’ | |||
| Yes | 16 (15.5) | 1.09 (0.60–1.98) | 0.774 |
| No | 87 (84.5) | ||
| Previous stool test† | |||
| Yes | 45 (43,7) | 1.16 (0.75–1.71) | 0.498 |
| No | 58 (56.3) |
1WP: Women’s Prison
2MSP: Maximum Security Prison
3SOC: Semi-open Colony
4CI: confidence interval
*Odds ratios were considered significantly different from 1.0 when p < 0.05.
† Subjects were asked whether they had undergone a stool test or received prophylactic antiparasitic treatment in the previous two years.