目的 探索宁夏流浪犬和野外犬科动物驱虫的投药方法、频次、剂量，评价驱虫效果，为控制流浪犬和野外犬科动物的棘球蚴感染提供参考依据。方法 在宁夏3个多房棘球蚴病流行区（西吉县、原州区和海原县）各随机选择4个村作为流浪犬驱虫点，在3个县（区）的自然林场外围各选择2个点作为野外犬科动物驱虫点，于2023年4—6月和9月进行投药（吡喹酮咀嚼片，0.1 g/片）。流浪犬驱虫点、野外犬科动物驱虫点均设直线法和环形法2种投药方法，每种投药方法均设1片和2片剂量组。投药后3 d，统计各点药物吞服情况，计算吞服率；采集犬科动物新鲜粪样，ELISA检测粪棘球绦虫抗原，计算粪抗原阳性率；采用布夹法在野外犬科动物驱虫点捕捉小型啮齿类动物，鉴定种类后剖解查找疑似病灶，石蜡切片后苏木精-伊红染色，显微镜下观察原头节，计算啮齿动物患病率。采用Epi info 3.5.3软件建立数据库，采用SPSS 22.0软件进行统计学分析。率的比较采用方差分析、χ²检验或U检验。结果 环形法的流浪犬驱虫点药物吞服率为70.98%（269/379），高于直线法的45.38%（172/379）（F = 13.577，P < 0.05）；不同投药剂量的直线法和环形法吞服率差异均无统计学意义（F = 0.731、1.124，均P > 0.05）。直线法的野外犬科动物驱虫点药物吞服率为为72.94%（124/170），高于环形法的49.12%（84/171）（F = 4.950，P < 0.05）；不同投药剂量的直线法和环形法吞服率差异均无统计学意义（F = 0.200、0.341，均P > 0.05）。环形法的流浪犬驱虫点粪抗原阳性率为2.84%（14/493），低于直线法的5.66%（28/495）（χ² = 4.423，P < 0.05）；直线法的野外犬科动物驱虫点粪抗原阳性率为2.85%（7/246），低于环形法的6.94%（17/245）（χ² = 4.013，P < 0.05）。共捕获小型啮齿类动物9种562只，患病率为0.89%（5/562）；5只患病啮齿动物均为阿拉善黄鼠，阿拉善黄鼠的患病率为1.58%（5/317）。直线法和环形法驱虫点的小型啮齿类动物患病率分别为1.18%（2/169）和2.03%（3/148），差异无统计学意义（χ² = 0.350，P > 0.05）。结论 直线法适用于对公路、溪流沿线等环境的野外犬科动物进行投药，环形法适用于对人居环境的流浪犬进行投药，连续投药3个月以上可有效控制犬科动物的棘球绦虫感染。

Objective To explore the method, frequency and dose of deworming in stray dogs and wild canine, evaluate the deworming effect, and provide reference for controlling hydatid infection in stray dogs and wild canine. Methods Four villages were randomly selected in each of the 3 alveolar echinococcosis endemic areas in Ningxia (Xiji, Yuanzhou and Haiyuan) as deworming sites for stray dogs, and 2 sites were selected in each of the natural forest farms in the 3 counties (districts) as deworming sites for wild canine. The praziquantel was administered from April to June and September in 2023 (chewable tablets, 0.1 g/tablet). The linear method and circular method were used in both stray dog deworming sites and wild canine deworming sites, and each administration method was performed with dosages of 1-tablet and 2-tablet. Three days after administration, the drug swallow rate at each deworming site was calculated. Fresh fecal samples were collected from canine, and Echinococcus coproantigen was detected by ELISA to calculate the positive rate. The cloth clip method was used to capture The small rodents at wild canine deworming sites were captured using trap layout method and identified. The suspected echinococcosis lesions of small rodents were paraffin sectioned and stained with hematoxylin and eosin. The protoscoleces were observed under the microscope to calculate the rodent prevalence rate. The database was established using Epi info 3.5.3 software and SPSS 22.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Rates were compared by ANOVA, chi-square test or U test. Results The drug swallow rate at the stray dog deworming sites using the circular method was 70.98% (269/379), which was higher than that of 45.38% (172/379) using the linear method (F = 13.577, P < 0.05); there were no statistically significant differences in the swallow rates between the linear method and the circular method for different dosages (F = 0.731, 1.124, both P > 0.05). The drug swallow rate at the wild canine deworming sites using the linear method was 72.94% (124/170), which was higher than that of 49.12% (84/171) using the circular method (F = 4.950, P < 0.05); there were no statistically significant differences in the swallow rates between the linear method and the circular method for different dosages (F = 0.200, 0.341, both P > 0.05). The coproantigen positivity rate of stray dog deworming sites using the circular method was 2.84% (14/493), which was lower than that of 5.66% (28/495) using the linear method (χ² = 4.423, P < 0.05); and the coproantigen positivity rate of wild canine deworming sites using the linear method was 2.85% (7/246), which was lower than that of 6.94% (17/245) using the circular method (χ² = 4.013, P < 0.05). A total of 562 small rodents of 9 species were captured, with a prevalence rate of 0.89% (5/562). All 5 diseased rodents were Spermophilcus alashanicus, with the prevalence rate of 1.58% (5/317). The prevalence rates of small rodents at the deworming sites of the linear method and the circular method were 1.18% (2/169) and 2.03% (3/148), respectively, with no statistically significant difference (χ² = 0.350, P > 0.05). Conclusion The linear method is suitable for administering drugs to wild canine along highways, streams and other environments. The circular method is suitable for administering drugs to stray dogs in living environments. Continuous administration for more than 3 months can effectively control hydatid infection in canine hosts.