4.2 Article

Intestinal parasitic infection among foreign housemaids in northwestern Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study

Journal

PARASITOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 80, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.parint.2020.102208

Keywords

Prevalence; Intestinal parasitic infections; Housemaids; Saudi Arabia

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to Saudi Arabia's high-income economy, many families hire foreign housemaids, increasing the risk of transmitting intestinal parasites to the community. A study in northwestern Saudi Arabia found that 20.11% of foreign housemaids were infected with intestinal parasites, including helminths and protozoans. More vigilance and follow-up are needed to address this public health concern.
Owing to Saudi Arabia's high-income economy many Saudi families hire foreign housemaids. However, since the housemaids are potential carriers of intestinal parasites, hiring them increases the risk of transmission to the Saudi community. In this context, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in foreign housemaids in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Using direct wet mount and concentration by flotation, the stool samples of 169 housemaids were examined, and eleven parasite species, six helminths and five protozoans, were detected. The overall prevalence of intestinal parasitic infection was 20.11% (34/169). Twelve cases were infected with one intestinal helminth, 12 were infected with one intestinal protozoan, and 10 had polyparasitism. The most common intestinal parasites were Cryptosporidium spp. (n = 10), hookworms (n = 7), and T. Trichiura (n = 7). The findings highlight that intestinal parasites present an important public health concern for foreign housemaids in Saudi Arabia. More vigilance is thus required, and periodic follow-up should be exercised throughout foreign housemaids' stay in the country.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available