Field assessment of a novel spatial repellent for malaria control: a feasibility and acceptability study in Mondulkiri, Cambodia
Abstract Background Large-scale use of insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying have contributed to a significant decrease in malaria transmission worldwide. Further reduction and progress towards elimination, however, require complementary control measures which can address the remaini...
| Published in: | Malaria Journal |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-017-2059-6 https://doaj.org/article/931d007fbf7b4849907d4b78e726706f |
| Summary: | Abstract Background Large-scale use of insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying have contributed to a significant decrease in malaria transmission worldwide. Further reduction and progress towards elimination, however, require complementary control measures which can address the remaining gaps in protection from mosquito bites. Following the development of novel pyrethroids with high knockdown effects on malaria vectors, programmatic use of spatial repellents has been suggested as one potential strategy to fill the gaps. This report explores social and contextual factors that may influence the relevance, uptake and sustainable use of a spatial repellent in two remote villages in Mondulkiri province, Cambodia, with endemic malaria transmission. The repellent consisted of polyethylene emanators, held in an open plastic frame and impregnated with 10% metofluthrin. Results In a baseline survey, 90.9% of households in Ou Chra (n = 30/33) and 96.6% in Pu Cha (n = 57/59) were interviewed. Behavioural data were collected for all household occupants (n = 448). In both villages, there were times and places in which people remained exposed to mosquito bites. Prior to the installation of the repellent, 50.6 and 59.5% of respondents noted that bites occurred “very often” inside the house and in the outdoor area surrounding the house, respectively. Indoor biting was reported to occur more frequently in the evening, followed by at night, while outdoor biting occurred more frequently in the early morning. In a follow-up survey, spatial repellents were well received in both villages, although 63.2% of respondents would not replace bed nets with repellents. Most participants (96.6%) were willing to use the product again; the mean willingness to pay was US$ 0.3 per unit. A preference for local procurement methods emerged. Conclusion Widespread use of spatial repellents would not fill all protective gaps, but, if their entomological efficacy can be ascertained, outdoor application has the potential to enhance vector ... |
|---|