It is estimated that around 3.5 billion people worldwide are affected by toxoplasmosis, the prevalence of which depends on geographical, climatic and socioeconomic conditions. This study was conducted to determine de sero-prevalence of toxoplasmosis among pregnant women attending the antenatal clinic in Bunia Health District. Cross sectional method supported by questionnaire was used in this study. The sample was made up of 375 pregnant women, through multi stage sampling. Content analysis supported by percentage calculation served to analyse data. After analysis, this study revealed that sero-prevalence of toxoplasmosis among pregnant women attending antenatal clinic in Bunia health District is 5.07%. Women aged 15-19 years were the most affected by toxoplasmosis in Bunia Health District, the pregnancy age was of 3-5 months, respectively to primiparous and multiparous. From these results, there is a strong need to strengthen pregnant women awareness on preventative means of toxoplasmosis using contextual strategies in Bunia Health District.

The population takes care of itself, sometimes abandons first aid structures made affordable for them, and joins informal structures, prayer rooms or alternative medicines, less expensive and considered gentler in rural areas. The situation is becoming more alarming because the population is impoverished, which still does not make the attendance of health centers at the community level always evident. This study aims to describe the impacts of subsidy of care among children under of 5 years in the Bunia health zone. To carry out this work, the transversal method supported by the semi-structural interview made it possible to carry out this work with the 20 ITs in the Bunia health zone. After analysis, we reached the results according to which 85.0% of health structures receive the care subsidy; 55.0% of health structures stipulate the increase in patients as a subsidy advantage; 40.0% of health structures reported the non-treatment of all illnesses as disadvantages of subsidy 35.0% of health structures reported patient satisfaction as socio-economic impacts of subsidy; Health structures reported that the impact of subsidy on quality of service is to offer quality care and not to offer quality care respectively 30.0%; excluding 90.0% of health structures are motivated by the care subsidy; 50.0% of health structures reported the reduction in maternal and neonatal as a subsidy impact on the operation of services; 45.0% of health structures reported the supply of medicines as a type of motivation for care; 60.0% of health structures reported not having a maintenance subsidy of building. Given these results, we believe that the subsidy significantly increases the use of healthcare services and allows the entire population to have access to healthcare.