Occurrence of Intestinal and Caecal Coccidiosis in Rajasri Birds

Coccidiosis in poultry is still considered as one of the main diseases affecting performance of poultry reared under intensive production systems. Coccidiosis was diagnosed in Rajasri birds upon routine postmortem examination conducted at Department of Veterinary Pathology, College of Veterinary Science, Hyderabad. PM examination of 423 birds conducted during a period of one month, out of which 136 birds were diagnosed with intestinal coccidiosis (32.15%) and 120 birds with caecal coccidiosis (28.36%). Clinically birds showed weakness, somnolence, ruffled feathers, pale comb, mucoid bloody diarrhea and death. Coccidiosis was initially diagnosed on the basis of faecal smear examination and histopathological alterations in intestines. Gross examination of birds showed pale muscle, dehydrated and emaciated carcass. Extremely ballooned intestine and caeca and haemorrhages in intestinal mucosa were seen. Upon opening of the small intestines and caeca, watery ingesta mixed with mucus and blood was observed. Faecal smears made from duodenum, jejunum, ileum and caecum revealed coccidial oocysts. Histopathological examination of intestine and caecum revealed coccidia lifecycle stages with destruction of different layers of the intestine and caecum with infiltration of heterophils and mononuclear cells (MNC)

Quantitative vs qualitative research methods.

Quantitative methods have been widely used because of the fact that things that can be measured or counted gain scientific credibility over the unmeasurable. But the extent of biological abnormality, severity, consequences and the impact of illness cannot be satisfactorily captured and answered by the quantitative research alone. In such situations qualitative methods take a holistic perspective preserving the complexities of human behavior by addressing the "why" and "how" questions. In this paper an attempt has been made to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both the methods and also that a balanced mix of both qualitative as well as quantitative methods yield the most valid and reliable results.

Focus group discussions in medical research.

Qualitative research methods have recently started to gain popularity in social and health sciences for determining a more holistic view of peoples' perceptions about health. Focus group discussions are frequently used to obtain perspectives and attitudes of people about issues, seek explanations for behavior, triangulate data obtained through other qualitative methods and generate hypotheses. To facilitate clinicians to comprehend the use of focus group methodology in the clinical field, the meaning, purpose, advantages, limitations and quality assurance measures of focus group discussions are described. The general requirements and the method for conducting focus groups are briefly explained. In addition, key issues that could be addressed by focus group methodology have also been highlighted.