Prevalence of malaria parasiteamia among pregnant women (age range 20-50years) that attended mile four maternity hospital and Federal Teaching Hospital Abakiliki was analysed using standard laboratory procedure. The subjects were grouped based on age bracket, place of residence (rural, urban, and semi), occupation and prophylactic antimalaria drugs used. Thick film and giemsa staning was used for the malaria parasite identification and malaria parasite density calculation. Out of the 98 antenatal pregnant women blood sample analysed, 22(22%) of the blood film was positive for malaria parasite. Highest prevalence was seen in age group20-25years of age range 5(5.1%) followed by26-30yearsof age range 9(9.2%)and 31-40years of age range 5(5.1%). with the least prevalence in 41-50years of age range 3(3.1%).At 95% confidence interval. X: cal 1.48 < X2tab7.815. P= 0.6869. By conventional criteria, the difference is considered not to be statistically significant. Parasite densitycount was done in all positive samples, which is compared and categorized according to settlement ranged from 01 to 400 parasite/ul. The highest parasite density was recorded among rural dwellers 3(01-100) parasite/ul. 2(101-200) parasite/ul 3(201-300) parasite/ul, 2(301-400) parasite/ul. this is followed by urban dwellers 1(01-100) parasite/ul. 1(101-200) parasite/ul 4(201-300) parasite/ul. 1(301-400) parasite/ul, with least occurrence among semi urban dwellers 1(01-100) parasite/ul, 2(101-200) parasite/ul and 3(301-400) parasite/ul respectively. Prevalence of malaria parasite based on socio demographic profiles, analysis of occupational based prevalence showed highest prevalence among farmers 7(30.4%). followed by unskilled labourer 8(25.8%). then civil servants 4(23.5%) with least occurrence among skilled labourers. Malaria parasite prevalence based on settlement indicated highest occurrence among rural dwellers 11(27.5%), followed by urban dwellers 5(20.8%) with least occurrence among semi urban dwellers 6(17.6%). Analysis of prophylaxis based parameter indicated a prevalence of 14(25.0%) (Those who are not on prophylaxis) compared to a prevalence of 6(19.0%) among those not on prophylaxis