Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
4. dang van chuc
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

4. dang van chuc

344

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
344
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Some determinants of urinary tract infection in children from 2 months to 6 years old In hai phong vietnam In 2008 Dang Van Chuc Nguyen Ngoc Sang Dang Viet Linh
  • 2. 1. introduction • Urinary Tract Infection (UTI): - Renal Scarring=> anemia, hypertention (7-17%), preclampsia, clampsia, renal failure and ended stage renal diseases. - Hospital based studies. - Limited community based studies Objective: To determine some risk factors of UTI in children from 2 month to 6 years old at some areas of Hai Phong.
  • 3. 2. Population and method 2.1. Population and research time. - All children from 2 months to 6 years old at some areas of H - Research time: 7/2006-10/2008. -UTI criteria: Leucocyturia ≥ 30/mm3 and bacteriuria ≥ 105/m 2.2. Method - Research area: 3 counties/districts representative of rural, u coastal of HP. - Study design: Descriptive and Cross-sectional study. - Sample size: using the following formula:
  • 4. 2 p1 p n Z 1 / 2 d2 n: Sample Size Z21-α/2 = (1,96)2 (Confidence degree 95%) p = 0,04 (UTI incidence in children of HP in a commune from Nguyen Ngoc Sang et al in 2005) d: Expected accuracy = 20% of p Applying to this formula , it needs about 4610 children for the study. -Sampling procedure: Multistage sampling. 3 county/districts: Kien An (urban), Kien Thuy (coastal) and Thuy Ng 9 cummunes: Nam son, Trang Minh and Van au (Kien An), ai Ha, T and Ngu oan(Kien Thuy), Phuc Le, Lap Le and Pha Le (Thuy Nguyen
  • 5. - Data collection: + Determing UTI: Clean morning midstream urine samples were used to scr for urinary tract infection. UTI was defined when having both bacteriuria ≥105/ml and Leucocyturia ≥ 30/mm3. + Children’ parent interview: On socio-economic conditions, children’s diseases and history of children’diseases. + Physical examination: Pediatricians directly examined children to find out childre diseases then weigh and measure to estimate their nutritio status.
  • 6. Data analysis: Using Epi-Info and SPSS version 13.0 to enter and analyse data, calculate UTI incidence and determ risk factors. Dependent variables: 128 UTI cases, independent va socio-economic and children’s diseases. Risk factor: OR>1, 95% IC includes OR. Multivariable analysis by using Logistics Regression
  • 7. 3. results 3.1. Common information on children: -There were 4631 children screened among them boys were 2268 (49%); girls 2363 (51%); rural children 1603 (34,6%); coastal children 1568 (33,9%); urban children 1460 (31,5%). -128 children had both leucocyturia and bacteriuri UTI incidence was 2.8%.
  • 8. 3.2. Some determinants of UTI: Table 1. The relationship of socio-economic condition and UTI. OR OR Risk Rate Bi Multi Exposure n 95%CI 95%CI factors % variable variabl s es Maternal < secondary* 105 3.1 1.7 1.1-2.7 education ≥ secondary 23 1.8 Paternal < secondary * 109 3.3 2.2 1.3-3.7 education ≥ secondary 19 1.5 Poverty* 29 5.8 Economy 2.5 1.6-3.8 2.9 1.3-6.5 Non poverty 99 2.4 Unsafe water 31 2.6 Water 0.9 0.6-1.3 Safe water 97 2.8 Ware of Unware of UTI 115 2.8 1.2 0.7-2.2 UTI Ware 13 2.3 Paternal Indirect paternal care 84 3.6 care of of child* 1.9 1.3-2.8 child Direct care 44 1.9
  • 9. 3.2. Some determinants of UTI: Table 2. The relationship of socio-economic condition and UTI (continu OR OR Risk Rate Bi Multi Exposure n 95%CI 95%CI factors % variable variable s s Maternal Indirect maternal 71 3.9 1.4- care of care of child* 1.9 2.8 child Direct care 57 2.0 Stable 73 2.5 0.5- House 0.7 Unatable 55 3.3 1.1 Unhygienic 58 2.3 0.4- Lavatory lavatory 0.65 0.9 Hygienic lavatory 70 3.4 House’s < 20 m2 98 2.5 0.3- 0.5 square ≥ 20 m2 30 4.3 0.8
  • 10. 3.2. Some determinants of UTI: Table 3. The relationship of hygienic factors and UTI. OR OR Risk Rate Bi 95%C Exposure n 95%CI Multi factors % variable I variables s Hygiene Clean* 102 3.3 1.3- after 1.9 Clean and 3.0 urination 26 1.8 washing Yes* 23 5.8 1.5- Diaper 2.4 3.8 No 105 2.5 Hygiene Clean * 99 3.2 1.1- after 1.7 Clean and 2.6 stool 29 1.9 washing
  • 11. 3.2. Some determinants of UTI: Table 4. The relationship of hygienic factors and UTI (continued). OR OR Risk Rate Bi 95% Multi 95%C Exposure n factors % variable CI variable I s s Posterio- 123 2.9 Way of anterior* 1.1- 1.2- washing Anterio- 2.6 1.9 6.3 3.9 after stool posterior, in 5 1.2 place Kinder- Yes 94 2.6 0.5- 0.9 garten 1.1 No 34 3.3 Yes 16 2.5 0.5- Preschool 0.8 1.4 No 112 2.8
  • 12. 3.2. Some determinants of UTI: Table 5. The relationship of children’s diseases and UTI. OR OR Exposur Rate Multi 95%C Risk factors n Bi 95%CI e % variable I variables s Yes * 49 3.5 Stunting 1.4 1.0-2.1 No 79 2.4 Yes * 41 4.0 1.1- Low weight 1.6 1.1-2.4 1.7 No 87 2.4 3.3 Yes * 26 4.7 Wasting 1.97 1.3-3.3 No 102 2.5 Yes * 30 6.6 3.7- 3.7- Phimosis 6.6 6.7 No 19 1.0 11.9 12.2 Yes * 44 4.6 Constipation 2.0 1.4-2.9 No 84 2.3 Yes * 81 3.3 Enuresis 1.5 1.1-2.3 No 45 2.1
  • 13. 4. conclusion - Family poverty - Low weight malnutrition - Phimosis in boys - Parental Incorrect washing method for their child

×