| Literature DB >> 25896604 |
Narjis G Thawer1, Jeremiah M Ngondi2, Frances E Mugalura3, Isaac Emmanuel4, Charles D Mwalimu5, Evangelia Morou6,7, John Vontas8,9, Natacha Protopopoff10, Mark Rowland11, Joshua Mutagahywa12, Shabbir Lalji13, Fabrizio Molteni14, Mahdi M Ramsan15, Ritha Willilo16, Alexandra Wright17, Jessica M Kafuko18, Isaiah Ndong19, Richard Reithinger20, Stephen Masingili Magesa21.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bendiocarb was introduced for the first time for Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) in Tanzania in 2012 as part of the interim national insecticide resistance management plan. This move followed reports of increasingly alarming levels of pyrethroid resistance across the country. This study used the insecticide quantification kit (IQK) to investigate the intra-operational IRS coverage and quality of spraying, and decay rate of bendiocarb on different wall surfaces in Kagera region.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25896604 PMCID: PMC4424830 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-0859-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Sample collection for assessing A) The quality of spraying and B) Decay rate of bendiocarb from the square drawn in the middle of the left wall of the living room.
Figure 2Procedures involved in determining insecticide content after indoor residual spraying using the insecticide quantification kit.
Scoring criteria based on manufacturer’s recommendations
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| >0.39 | Below 20 mg/m2 | No residual insecticide |
| 0.3-0.39 | 20-100 mg/m2 | Insecticide dose below WHO recommendation |
| <0.3 | 100-400 mg/m2 | Insecticide dose meets WHO recommendation |
Indoor residual spraying coverage in Karagwe and Muleba districts
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| Karagwe | 58 | 287 | 12.9% (37) | 2.8% (8) | 84.3% (242) |
| Muleba | 46 | 218 | 1.8% (4) | 1.8% (4) | 96.3% (210) |
| Total | 104 | 505 | 8.1% (41) | 2.4% (12) | 89.5% (452) |
*4 samples spoilt, thus not analysed.
Variation in quality of spraying in Karagwe and Muleba districts
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| Karagwe | 58 | 5.2% (3) | 25.9% (15) | 68.9% (40) |
| Muleba | 46 | 0.0% (0) | 15.2% (7) | 84.8% (39) |
| Total | 104 | 2.9% (3) | 21.2% (22) | 75.9% (79) |
Figure 3Box plots showing the distribution of the concentration of bendiocarb in Karagwe and Muleba districts to determine the variation in the quality of spraying. The dashed line represents the recommended WHO threshold level of less than 0.3.
Figure 4Box plots showing the distribution of the concentration of bendiocarb in different wall substrates in Karagwe (A) and Muleba (B) districts. The dashed line represents the recommended WHO threshold level of less than 0.3.
Figure 5Decay rate of bendiocarb over five months post spraying showing the proportion of houses with different insecticide levels at each month displayed for both districts combined (Total) and individual (Karagwe and Muleba) districts.