Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g7rbq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T17:41:43.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epidemiological analysis of factors influencing rate of progress in Echinococcus granulosus control in New Zealand

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

M. J. Burridge  and
C. W. Schwabe
M. J. Burridge
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California 95616, U.S.A.
C. W. Schwabe
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California 95616, U.S.A.
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.

The factors influencing the rate of progress in Echinococcus granulosus control in New Zealand were analysed by hydatid control area using stepwise multiple regression techniques. The results indicated that the rate of progress was related positively to initial E. granulosus prevalence in dogs and the efficiency with which local authorities implemented national control policy, and negatively to the Maori proportion in the local population and the number of dogs per owner. Problems in analysis of the New Zealand data are discussed and improved methods of monitoring progress in hydatid disease control programmes are described.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 151 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

References

REFERENCES

Anon, (1957). The present hydatid situation in New Zealand and the urgent need for a new approach. New Zealand Medical Journal 56, 138–9.Google Scholar
Anon, (1967). Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Hydatids Eradication. Wellington: R. E. Owen, Government Printer.Google Scholar
Araujo, F. P., Schwabe, C. W., Sawyer, J. C. & Davis, W. G. (1975). Hydatid disease transmission in California: a study of the Basque connection. American Journal of Epidemiology 102, 291–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beard, T. C. (1969). Hydatid control: a problem in health education. Medical Journal of Australia 2, 456–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beard, T. C. (1973). The elimination of echinococcosis from Iceland. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 48, 653–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Begg, N. C. (1961). The campaign against hydatid disease: an experiment in social medicine. New Zealand Medical Journal 60, 229–34.Google ScholarPubMed
Begg, N. C., Begg, A. C. & Robinson, R. G. (1957). Primary hydatid disease of the brain – its diagnosis, radiological investigation, treatment and prevention. New Zealand Medical Journal 56, 84–98.Google ScholarPubMed
Bramble, A. J. (1974). Hydatid disease control 1964–74: a report on ten years of effort to control hydatid disease in Tasmania. Tasmanian Journal of Agriculture 45, 225–32.Google Scholar
Bramble, A. J. (1975). Hydatid disease control in Tasmania…progress and new developments. Tasmanian Journal of Agriculture 46, 231–6.Google Scholar
Burridge, M. J. & Schwabe, C. W. (1977 a). Hydatid disease in New Zealand: an epidemiological study of transmission among Maoris. American Journal of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene. 26 (In the Press.)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burridge, M. J. and Schwabe, C. W. (1977 b). An epidemiological analysis of factors influencing the increase in Taenia ovis prevalence during the New Zealand Echinococcus granulosus control program. Australian Veterinary Journal 53 (In the Press.)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burridge, M. J., Schwabe, C. W. & Fraser, J. (1977). Hydatid disease in New Zealand: changing patterns in human infection, 1878–1972. New Zealand Medical Journal 85, (In the Press).Google ScholarPubMed
Burridge, M. J., Schwabe, C. W. & Pullum, T. W. (1977). Path analysis: application in an epidemiological study of echinococcosis in New Zealand. Journal of Hygiene 78, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dungal, N. (1957). Eradication of hydatid disease in Iceland. New Zealand Medical Journal 56, 213–22.Google ScholarPubMed
Forbes, L. S. (1961). Arecoline hydrobromide enemata and their use in dogs to improve purgative efficiency of the drug administered orally. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 9, 105–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fosbes, F. H. (1958). Hydatid disease in New Zealand. New Zealand Medical Journal 57, 562–71.Google Scholar
Gemmell, M. A. (1958). Arecoline hydrobromide as a taeniafuge in dogs, with special reference to its use in controlling hydatid disease. Australian Veterinary Journal 34, 207–12.Google Scholar
Gemmell, M. A. (1961). Hydatid disease in Australasia. Bulletin de l'office International des Épizooties 56, 1009–29.Google Scholar
Gemmell, M. A. (1968). The Styx field-trial: a study on the application of control measures against hydatid disease caused by Echinococcus granulosus. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 39, 73–100.Google Scholar
Gregory, G. G. (1973). A survey of tapeworms in rural dogs in Tasmania. Australian Veterinary Journal 49, 273–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, P. J. & Arundel, J. H. (1971). The incidence of tapeworms in rural dogs in Victoria. Australian Veterinary Journal 47, 46–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krabbe, H. (1864). [Observations for Icelanders on Hydatids and Precautions Against Them.] Copenhagen: Schultz, J. H.. Translated by I. R. Maxwell, with foreword by T. C., in Australian Veterinary Journal (1973) 49, 395–401.Google Scholar
Laing, A. D. M. G. (1961). The implementation of hydatid eradication measures in New Zealand. Bulletin de l'office International des Épizooties 56, 1030–9.Google Scholar
Macdonald, R. G. (1888–9). Hydatid disease in New Zealand. New Zealand Medical Journal 2, 80–9.Google Scholar
Meldrum, G. K. & McConnell, J. D. (1968). The control of hydatid disease in Tasmania. Australian Veterinary Journal 44, 212–17.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. S. (1972). Human behaviour in the transmission of parasitic disease. In Behavioural Aspects of Parasite Transmission(ed. Canning, E. U. and Wright, C. A.), pp. 109–22. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K. & Bent, D. H. (1975). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Polydorou, K. (1971). Hydatid disease in Cyprus. Bulletin de l'office International des Épizooties 76, 611–9.Google Scholar
Purriel, P., Schantz, P. M., Beovide, H. & Mendoza, G. (1973). Human echinococcosis (hydatidosis) in Uruguay: a comparison of indices of morbidity and mortality, 1962–71. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 49, 395–402.Google Scholar
Schantz, P. M. & Schwabe, C. (1969). Worldwide status of hydatid disease control. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 155, 2104–21.Google ScholarPubMed
Schwabe, C. W. (1969). Veterinary Medicine and Human Health, 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Wodzicki, K. A. (1950). Introduced mammals of New Zealand: an ecological and economic survey. Bulletin of the New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, no. 98.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (1968). Research needs in echinococcosis (hydatidosis). Bulletin of the World Health Organization 39, 101–13.Google Scholar