| Literature DB >> 27216734 |
Daniel Msellemu1,2, Hagai I Namango1,3, Victoria M Mwakalinga1,4, Alex J Ntamatungiro1,2, Yeromin Mlacha1,5, Zacharia J Mtema1, Samson Kiware1,6, Neil F Lobo7, Silas Majambere1,5, Stefan Dongus1,5,8,9, Christopher J Drakeley2, Nicodem J Govella1,5, Prosper P Chaki1,5, Gerry F Killeen10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the Tanzanian city of Dar es Salaam, high coverage of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), larvicide application (LA) and mosquito-proofed housing, was complemented with improved access to artemisinin-based combination therapy and rapid diagnostic tests by the end of 2012.Entities:
Keywords: Anopheles; Chronic infection; Housing; Larval source management; Long-lasting insecticidal net; Malaria; Mosquito; Plasmodium; Vector control; Window screening
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27216734 PMCID: PMC4877954 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-016-1340-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Map of where Dar es Salaam city region is located within Tanzania (a), the study area within the city and its three municipalities (b), and the survey locations and wards in which larvicides were applied (c)
Fig. 2Long-term trends in coverage with malaria control interventions, entomological malaria transmission hazard, and prevalence of fever and malaria infection. To allow direct comparison of results from this study from 2010 to 2012, with the previous study from 2004 to 2008 [15, 40], only data from the original 15 city centre wards common to both studies (Fig. 1) were included and summarized by survey round. a Schematic summary of specific intervention introductions; b Stayed in a ward with larvicide application (LA) last night; c Stayed in a house with mosquito-proofed windows, ceilings or eaves; d Used a bed net or long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) the previous night; e Treated with an artemisinin-based therapy, including artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), or with any other anti-malarial, if had a fever in the previous 2 weeks; f Outdoor rates of human exposure to biting malaria vectors; g Outdoor rates of human exposure to infectious bites by malaria vectors; h Prevalence of reported fever and parasitologically-confirmed malaria infection
Fig. 3Short-term trends in coverage with malaria control interventions across the city of Dar es Salaam over the course of this study, summarized by quarterly mean. a Schematic summary of specific intervention introductions; b Vector densities; c Prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum infection and recollection of fever; d Anti-malarial drug use; e Bed net use the previous night; f Stayed in a mosquito-proofed house; g Proportion of potential human exposure to biting vectors expected to occur while asleep or indoors in the absence of protective bed nets or mosquito-proofed housing; h Stayed in a ward with larvicide application (LA) last night
Factors affecting numbers of Anopheles gambiae malaria vectors caught in Ifakara tent traps over 12,170 trap nights of capture in 1562 locations distributed across Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
| Variable | Proportion (n) | Odds ratio [95 % CI] | P |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| New study ward | 51.0 % (6211) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Old UMCP study ward | 49.0 % (5959) | 3.36 [2.14, 5.29] | 0.033 |
|
| |||
| No larviciding | 38.3 % (4664) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Granule application managed by contractora | 19.9 % (2416) | 0.83 [0.16, 4.2] | 0.820 |
| Granule application managed by Ministry of Health & Social Welfare (MoHSW) | 5.9 % (717) | 0.31 [0.14, 0.71] | 0.0053 |
| Pre-diluted liquid application managed by MoHSW | 35.8 % (4373) | 0.15 [0.07, 0.30] | 0.000000079 |
|
| |||
| Increase in coverage by final round | From 51.0 to 71.2 % | 0.72 [0.51,1.01] | 0.057 |
NA not applicable
aExcluded from the final model by merging with reference group because non-significant, but presented here for illustrative purposes
bAssociation with community-level mean LLIN scale-up, captured by fitting city-wide mean reported LLIN use the previous night as a continuous covariate, so the relative rate presented is that estimated based on community-wide usage in the last round of surveys (71.2 %) versus the first (51.0 %)
Minimal logistic generalized linear mixed model describing risk factors for malaria among 9172 RDT-tested occupants of 2822 households in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, surveyed between March 2010 and May 2012, for whom valid values of all significant variables were recorded
| Variable | Proportion (n) | Odds ratio [95 % CI] | P |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| New study ward | 68.8 (7693) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Old UMCP study ward | 31.2 (3494) | 1.30 [1.02, 1.65] | 0.033 |
|
| |||
| Any | 96.8 % (8882) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| None | 3.2 % (290) | 1.90 [1.34, 2.71] | 0.00035 |
|
| |||
| Female | 63.9 % (5864) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Male | 36.1 % (3308) | 1.16 [1.03, 1.33] | 0.020 |
|
| |||
| Unscreened or screened but lowest | 34.1 % (3132) | 1 [NA] | NA |
| Screened and middle or highest | 65.9 % (6040) | 0.71 [0.62, 0.82] | 0.0000036 |
|
| |||
| No larviciding | 69.2 % (7744) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Granule application managed by contractorc | 11.9 % (1329) | 1.29 [0.78, 2.13] | 0.325 |
| Granule application managed by Ministry of Health & Social Welfare (MoHSW) | 4.9 % (551) | 0.26 [0.12, 0.56] | 0.00040 |
| Pre-diluted liquid application managed by MoHSWc | 14.0 % (1563) | 0.96 [0.67,1.37] | 0.836 |
|
| |||
| Didn’t use any bed net | 19.4 % (1773) | [NA] | NA |
| Used an untreated bed net | 29.8 % (2736) | 1.29 [1.03, 1.60] | 0.023 |
| Used a long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) | 50.8 % (4663) | 1.42 [1.16, 1.74] | 0.00063 |
|
| |||
| Increase in coverage by final round | From 51.0 to 71.2 % | 0.80 [0.69, 0.91] | 0.0013 |
|
| |||
| Had not slept away from home | 79.8 % (7322) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| Slept away from home at least once | 20.2 % (1850) | 0.69 [0.54, 0.88] | 0.0024 |
|
| |||
| One mosquito caught per trap per night | Continuum | 6.99 [1.12, 43.7] | 0.037 |
|
| |||
| Under 5 years | 16.7 (1873) | 1.00 [NA] | NA |
| 5–14 years | 18.4 (2062) | 1.06 [0.86, 1.32] | 0.542 |
| 15–24 years | 22.6 (2526) | 1.16 [0.95, 1.44] | 0.143 |
| 25–34 years | 18.2 (2040) | 0.97 [0.77, 1.21] | 0.776 |
| 35 years and above | 24.0 (2686) | 1.01 [0.82, 1.24] | 0.947 |
NA Not applicable
aBased on exploratory analysis as described in the main text, with glass, completely screened with no holes and completely screened with holes classified as adequately-screened and protective, whereas unscreened, torn or only partially screened were all classified as inadequately screened
bSee Fig. 8 for a description of the behavioural characteristics of the three terciles of this index of the proportion of human exposure to mosquitoes which occurs indoors and can be prevented with indoor vector control measures [74, 75, 106–109]
cExcluded from the final model because non-significant, but presented here for illustrative purposes
dAssociation with community-level mean LLIN scale-up, captured by fitting city-wide mean reported LLIN use the previous night as a continuous covariate, so the odds ratio presented is that estimated based on community-wide usage in the last round of1 surveys (71.2 %) versus the first (51.0 %)
ePresented here for illustrative purposes but excluded from the final mode, because reducing vector density is an intermediate outcome of both bed net use and larvicide application, so inclusion confounds evaluation of these vector control measures. Incorporated into the model as a square root-transformed continuous variable so the odds ratio presented represents that estimated for any area with an Anopheles gambiae density of one mosquito per tent trap per night compared with a location where none were detected by tent trapping. To get this threshold in context, the highest density of An. gambiae recorded was only slightly lower than this (Fig. 6)
Fig. 8Times at which individuals interviewed during cross-sectional household surveys in Dar es Salaam reported having gone indoors for the evening, gone to bed for the evening, gotten out of bed in the morning and left the house in the morning, the previous night, stratified by derived individual estimates for the proportion of exposure to An. gambiae bites that would occur indoors in the absence of a bed net or window screening (π ). For comparison with the biting activity profile of the most important malaria vector in the city, these frequencies of human behaviours are plotted alongside the human biting rates measured by human landing catch (HLC) in selected areas of relatively high vector density in 2006 [9, 10] that were used to calculate these individual estimates for π
Fig. 6The frequency distribution and dependence of Plasmodium falciparum malaria prevalence upon densities of Anopheles gambiae sensu lato in Dar es Salaam. The number and proportion (a, b) of RDT-tested human subjects, as well as the proportion of those which were diagnosed as infected with malaria in houses with (e, f) and without (c, d) window screening, are plotted against vector density, as measured by community based surveillance with Ifakara tent traps (a, c, e) and converted into the estimated equivalent outdoor human landing catch (b, d, f). Continuous lines represent the best fit of models relating malaria infection prevalence to vector density in houses with (c, d) and without (e, f) window screens
Fig. 4Time trends in physiological susceptibility to pyrethroids (a), sibling species composition (b), and biting activity distribution (c) of Anopheles gambiae sensu lato in Dar es Salaam. Physiological susceptibility estimates (a) were obtained from published surveys [110]. Sibling species composition data (b) were obtained from PCR analysis of mosquitoes caught through both the routine surveillance collections described here and a range of published [9, 10, 66, 68] and unpublished experimental studies of trapping methods conducted at intense sampling in foci of high vector density. Biting activity distribution data (c) were obtained from outdoor HLC data obtained through either routine surveillance from 2005 to 2008, or through quality assurance surveys of routine CB mosquito trapping with Ifakara tent traps between 2011 and 2012
Fig. 5The geographic distribution of surveyed locations with detectable populations of Anopheles gambiae vectors (a, c, e) and > 10 % Plasmodium falciparum infection prevalence (b, d, f) over the periods from March to December 2010 when application of a granular formulation of Bacillus thuriniensis var. israelensis (Bti) in the wards highlighted in green was managed by a private sector contractor (a, b), from January to August 2011 when the same granular formulation was applied under management of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW) in the same wards highlighted in green (c, d), and from September 2011 onwards when a pre-diluted liquid formulation of Bti was applied under MoHSW management in the wards highlighted in green and yellow (e, f)
Fig. 7Age-prevalence profiles for Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection observed by microscopy in previous cross-sectional surveys from 2004 to 2008 [15] (a) and by rapid diagnostic test in surveys during these subsequent surveys between 2010 and 2012 (b)