Parasitology, Poverty and Prevention: is there any relationship between the three P? Is it possible to eradicate Parasitic diseases without eliminating Poverty?
Authors: Tshima Guyguy Kabundi , Mulumba Paul Madishala 
Published: February 2019

AbstractContextTalking about Poverty is not obvious without examples, I would like to understand the link between Parasitology, Poverty and Prevention (the three P). I explain the three P by saying that there is four level of knowledge in Parasitology and the fourth level is the integration with other disciplines including virology with preventive measures, nutrition aspects with denutrition leading by some parasites as Ascaris, economy involving patient’s income and Poverty. As a reminder, the first level in Parasitology is the knowledge of the parasitic cycle with an emphasis on the mode of contamination, the second level is that of the implementation of technical or diagnostic means to identify the parasite in the laboratory or the bench and the third level is that of treating infected cases diagnosed in the laboratory.ObjectiveThe objective of this work is to contribute to reach the first sustainable development goal i.e. no Poverty. Specifically, this manuscript aimed to evaluate poverty with the protective measures against the harmful effects of mosquitoes that contribute to the quality of care given to patients of the University Hospital of Kinshasa (UHK).FindingsResidual mosquito capture, carried out in 31 randomly selected rooms per block and per level in hospital departments, presented the number of 1,144 female mosquitoes (845 Culex, 207 Anopheles and 62 Aedes). Overall considered, the Mean Mosquito Density (MMD) was 36.2 / mosquito per room (6.9 Anopheles / room, 29.1 Culex / room and 2.1 Aedes / room with an extreme between 0 and 144 mosquitoes / room. The lowest MMD (6.2 mosquitoes / room) was observed in Block II (clinical biology and microbiology laboratories, delivery and private hospitalization rooms) compared to other hospital blocks that had the highest MMD and statistically identical (ranging between 29.2 and 45.5 mosquitoes / room).Our observations give a good idea of Poverty inside this hospital and where to concentrate in the prevention of malaria transmission within the hospital. Regardless of the block considered, it was the ground floor with an MMD of 52.8 mosquitoes / room which were the most dangerous places compared with the first and second floors with MMD respectively 17.6 and 25.6 mosquitoes / room.ConclusionIn conclusion, the insufficiency of the UHK anti-mosquito measures was obvious. These should be applied without delay to prevent the risk of infection transmission by mosquitoes, even within the hospital, of hepatitis B virus and strains of Plasmodium falciparum, sometimes highly virulent, which may be concentrated there.LimitsWe were on the right track and this study needs more research because of its limitations: we investigate and did not find if any of the mosquitoes collected were infected; we did not investigate if the hospital had any patients with a mosquito transmitted disease in the rooms where the mosquitoes were collected.RecommendationThe recommendation is if it is not possible to eradicate parasitic diseases as malaria without eliminating poverty, then we need to eliminate them both.