Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of dog infections in 74 endemic counties of Tibet Autonomous Region in 2016 vs 2019

From: Assessment of echinococcosis control in Tibet Autonomous Region, China

Region/Prefecture/League/City

Endemic county

2016

2019

Weighted adjusted positive rate

Test results of two rates

Total dogs

No. of dog feces tested

No. of dog feces positive

Positive rate of dog feces (%) [95% CI]

Total dogs

No. of dog feces tested

No. of dog feces positive

Positive rate of dog feces (%) [95% CI]

Lhasa

Chengguan

25,186

324

29

9.0 [5.8, 12.1]

11,754

1060

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Linzhou

10,664

159

15

9.4 [4.8, 14.0]

4536

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Dangxiong

6209

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

1239

500

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Nimu

4562

80

4

5.0 [0.1, 9.9]

1568

80

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Qushui

8146

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.0]

2922

200

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Duilong Deqing

8221

163

1

0.6 [āˆ’Ā 0.6, 1.8]

757

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Dazi

6738

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

3258

300

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Mozhu Gongka

7589

81

6

7.4 [1.6, 13.2]

1185

280

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Changdu

Karuo

5928

319

5

1.6 [0.2, 2.9]

4008

120

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Jiangdaa

7468

160

8

5.0 [1.6, 8.4]

5105

108

10

9.3 [3.7, 14.8]

6.3

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Gongjue

1910

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.0]

972

100

3

3.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 6.4]

1.5

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Leiwuqia

1406

80

7

8.8 [2.4, 15.1]

856

100

4

4.0 [0.1, 7.9]

2.4

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Dingqinga

3972

160

11

6.9 [2.9, 10.8]

3,548

280

18

6.4 [3.5, 9.3]

5.7

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Chaya

4575

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0,6.0]

2246

100

7

7.0 [1.9, 12.1]

3.4

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Basu

4484

79

6

7.6 [1.6, 13.6]

2230

280

3

1.1 [āˆ’Ā 0.1, 2.3]

0.5

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Zuogonga

3476

80

20

25.0 [15.3, 34.7]

1820

101

4

4.0 [0.1, 7.8]

2.1

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Mangkang

5654

160

15

9.4 [4.8, 13.9]

4168

280

5

1.8 [0.2, 3.3]

1.3

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Luolong

3997

80

0

0.0

1139

100

2

2.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.8, 4.8]

0.6

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Bianba

2363

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.0]

2105

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Shannan

Naidong

7195

140

9

6.4 [2.3, 10.5]

3149

101

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Zanang

3034

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

1641

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Gongga

4422

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

2548

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Sangri

1457

72

3

4.2 [āˆ’Ā 0.6, 8.9]

590

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Qiongjie

2666

80

4

5.0 [0.1, 9.9]

589

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Qusong

876

80

1

1.3 [āˆ’Ā 1.2, 3.7]

476

280

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Cuomei

1240

114

43

37.7 [28.7, 46.8]

365

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Luozab

2226

80

0

0.0

547

100

0

0.0

0.0

/

Jiacha

2534

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.0]

1783

280

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Longzi

2646

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

763

280

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Cuona

902

80

11

13.8 [6.0, 21.5]

259

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Langkazi

3490

80

22

27.5 [17.5, 37.5]

1036

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Shigatse

Sangzhuzi

20,679

320

8

2.5 [0.8, 4.2]

4308

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Nanmulin

12,132

160

13

8.1 [3.8, 12.4]

415

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Jiangzi

11,312

160

8

5.0 [1.6, 8.4]

4334

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Dingri

6081

154

4

2.6 [0.1, 5.1]

6706

101

1

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 3.0]

1.1

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Sajia

4445

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

3489

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Lazi

4805

80

5

6.3 [0.8, 11.7]

1802

101

8

7.9 [2.6, 13.3]

3.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Angren

11,470

160

6

3.8 [0.8, 6.7]

1053

100

3

3.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 6.4]

0.3

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Xietongmen

7168

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

1662

100

7

7.0 [1.9, 12.1]

1.6

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Bailang

5954

80

5

6.3 [0.8, 11.7]

2868

101

2

2.0 [0.8, 4.7]

1.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Renbu

2154

83

1

1.2 [āˆ’Ā 1.2, 3.6]

1443

100

1

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 3.0]

0.7

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Kangma

5060

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

1748

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Dingjie

3327

80

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.0]

1279

100

2

2.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.8, 4.8]

0.8

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Zhongba

8597

80

8

10.0 [3.3, 16.7]

1587

100

3

3.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 6.4]

0.6

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Yadong

2551

28

5

17.9 [2.7, 33.0]

530

100

8

8.0 [2.6, 13.4]

1.7

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Jilong

2836

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

613

100

1

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 3.0]

0.2

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Nielamu

11,162

80

5

6.3 [0.8, 11.7]

3445

100

1

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 3.0]

0.3

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Saga

4445

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

863

100

1

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 3.0]

0.2

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Gangba

2576

80

0

0.0

711

100

3

3.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 6.4]

0.8

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Naqu City

Naqu County

15,011

322

23

7.1 [4.3, 10.0]

6170

101

5

5.0 [0.6, 9.3]

2.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Jiali

2979

80

10

12.5 [5.1, 19.9]

2999

950

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Biru

9927

160

4

2.5 [0.1, 4.9]

6275

100

6

6.0 [1.3, 10.7]

3.8

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Nierong

7500

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

4873

214

25

11.7 [7.3, 16.0]

7.6

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Anduo

4015

79

10

12.7 [5.2, 20.2]

2515

500

4

0.8 [0, 1.6]

0.5

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Shenza

1900

80

11

13.8 [6.0, 21.5]

237

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Suoxian

11,138

80

4

5.0 [0.1, 9.9]

3423

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Bange

4737

80

14

17.5 [9.0, 26.0]

1793

220

10

4.6 [1.8, 7.3]

1.7

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Baqing

12,530

46

19

41.3 [26.5, 56.1]

6578

276

17

6.2 [3.3, 9.0]

3.2

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Nima

5196

80

16

20.0 [11.0, 29.0]

4640

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Shuanghua

1930

40

14

35.0 [19.6, 50.4]

1240

280

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Ali

Pulan

1188

40

4

10.0 [0.3, 19.7]

1696

100

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Zhadab

550

25

0

0.0

288

100

0

0.0

0.0

/

Gaer

1165

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

1076

200

1

0.5 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 1.5]

0.5

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Ritu

1897

40

2

5.0 [āˆ’Ā 2.1, 12.1]

962

180

1

0.6 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 1.7]

0.3

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Geji

5266

79

2

2.5 [āˆ’Ā 1.0, 6.1]

2510

115

3

2.6 [āˆ’Ā 0.3, 5.6]

1.2

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Gaize

4539

79

15

19.0 [10.1, 27.8]

1632

200

5

2.5 [0.3, 4.7]

0.9

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Cuoqin

1558

80

5

6.3 [0.8, 11.7]

1492

200

1

0.5 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 1.5]

0.5

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Linzhi City [12]

Linzhi Countya

6775

117

27

23.1 [15.3, 30.8]

2783

1, 058

40

3.8 [2.6, 4.9]

1.6

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Gongbu Jiangda

6673

81

4

4.9 [0.1, 9.8]

2393

166

2

1.2 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 2.9]

0.4

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Milin

5351

80

1

1.3 [āˆ’Ā 1.2, 3.7]

2229

192

5

2.6 [0.3, 4.9]

1.1

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Motuo

2988

80

6

7.5 [1.6, 13.4]

432

120

2

1.7 [āˆ’Ā 0.7, 4.0]

0.2

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

Bomi

5578

80

1

1.3 [āˆ’Ā 1.2, 3.7]

2721

205

2

1.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 2.3]

0.5

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Chayua

2898

100

3

3.0 [āˆ’Ā 0.4, 6.4]

2078

200

0

0.0

0.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Langxian

1480

80

3

3.8 [āˆ’Ā 0.5, 8.0]

426

774

26

3.4 [2.1, 4.6]

1.0

Pā€‰>ā€‰0.05

Total

74 counties

406,759

7,564

552

7.3 [6.7, 7.9]

171, 479

14, 584

252

1.7 [1.5, 1.9]

0.7

Pā€‰<ā€‰0.05

  1. In the process of testing the two rates, different methods were selected according to data characteristics, and Fisher's exact test was used in most cases
  2. CI Confidence interval
  3. aChi-square test
  4. bBoth rates were 0, and therefore no test was performed