Alice Kamau1, Joseph M Mwangangi1,2,3, Martin K Rono1,3, Polycarp Mogeni1, Irene Omedo1, Janet Midega1,4, J Anthony G Scott1,5, Philip Bejon1,6. 1. KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kilifi, Kenya. 2. Integrated Vector and Disease Management Cluster, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi, Kenya. 3. Pwani University Bioscience Research Centre, Pwani University, Kilifi, Kenya. 4. Centre for Genomics and Global Health, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7BN, UK. 5. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK. 6. Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
Abstract
Background: Insecticide treated nets (ITNs) protect humans against bites from the Anopheles mosquito vectors that transmit malaria, thereby reducing malaria morbidity and mortality. It has been noted that ITN use leads to a switch from indoor to outdoor feeding among these vectors. It might be expected that outdoor feeding would undermine the effectiveness of ITNs that target indoors vectors, but data are limited. Methods: We linked homestead level geospatial data to clinical surveillance data at a primary healthcare facility in Kilifi County in order to map geographical heterogeneity in ITN effectiveness and observed vector feeding behaviour using landing catches and CDC light traps in six selected areas of varying ITN effectiveness. We quantified the interaction between mosquitoes and humans to evaluate whether outdoor vector biting is a potential explanation for the variation in ITN effectiveness. Results: We observed 37% and 46% visits associated with positive malaria slides among ITN users and non-ITN-users, respectively; ITN use was associated with 32% protection from malaria (crude OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.73). We obtained modification of ITN effectiveness by geographical area (p=0.016), and identified 6 hotspots using the spatial scan statistic. Majority of mosquitoes were caught outdoor (60%) and were of the An. funestus group (75%). The overall propensity to feed at times when most people were asleep was high; the vast majority of the Anopheles mosquitoes were caught at times when most people are indoors asleep. Estimates for the proportion of human-mosquito contact between the first and last hour when most humans were asleep was consistently high across all locations, ranging from 0.83 to 1.00. Conclusion: Our data do not provide evidence of an epidemiological association between microgeographical variations in ITN effectiveness and variations in the microgeographical distribution of outdoor biting.
Background: Insecticide treated nets (ITNs) protect humans against bites from the Anopheles mosquito vectors that transmit malaria, thereby reducing malaria morbidity and mortality. It has been noted that ITN use leads to a switch from indoor to outdoor feeding among these vectors. It might be expected that outdoor feeding would undermine the effectiveness of ITNs that target indoors vectors, but data are limited. Methods: We linked homestead level geospatial data to clinical surveillance data at a primary healthcare facility in Kilifi County in order to map geographical heterogeneity in ITN effectiveness and observed vector feeding behaviour using landing catches and CDC light traps in six selected areas of varying ITN effectiveness. We quantified the interaction between mosquitoes and humans to evaluate whether outdoor vector biting is a potential explanation for the variation in ITN effectiveness. Results: We observed 37% and 46% visits associated with positive malaria slides among ITN users and non-ITN-users, respectively; ITN use was associated with 32% protection from malaria (crude OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.73). We obtained modification of ITN effectiveness by geographical area (p=0.016), and identified 6 hotspots using the spatial scan statistic. Majority of mosquitoes were caught outdoor (60%) and were of the An. funestus group (75%). The overall propensity to feed at times when most people were asleep was high; the vast majority of the Anopheles mosquitoes were caught at times when most people are indoors asleep. Estimates for the proportion of human-mosquito contact between the first and last hour when most humans were asleep was consistently high across all locations, ranging from 0.83 to 1.00. Conclusion: Our data do not provide evidence of an epidemiological association between microgeographical variations in ITN effectiveness and variations in the microgeographical distribution of outdoor biting.
Authors: Penelope A Phillips-Howard; Bernard L Nahlen; Margarette S Kolczak; Allen W Hightower; Feiko O ter Kuile; Jane A Alaii; John E Gimnig; John Arudo; John M Vulule; Amos Odhacha; S Patrick Kachur; Erik Schoute; Daniel H Rosen; John D Sexton; Aggrey J Oloo; William A Hawley Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Penelope A Phillips-Howard; Bernard L Nahlen; Jane A Alaii; Feiko O ter Kuile; John E Gimnig; Dianne J Terlouw; S Patrick Kachur; Allen W Hightower; Altaf A Lal; Erik Schoute; Aggrey J Oloo; William A Hawley Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Francis M Mutuku; Charles H King; Peter Mungai; Charles Mbogo; Joseph Mwangangi; Eric M Muchiri; Edward D Walker; Uriel Kitron Journal: Malar J Date: 2011-12-13 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Polycarp Mogeni; Thomas N Williams; Gregory Fegan; Christopher Nyundo; Evasius Bauni; Kennedy Mwai; Irene Omedo; Patricia Njuguna; Charles R Newton; Faith Osier; James A Berkley; Laura L Hammitt; Brett Lowe; Gabriel Mwambingu; Ken Awuondo; Neema Mturi; Norbert Peshu; Robert W Snow; Abdisalan Noor; Kevin Marsh; Philip Bejon Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Emelda A Okiro; Victor A Alegana; Abdisalan M Noor; Juliette J Mutheu; Elizabeth Juma; Robert W Snow Journal: BMC Med Date: 2009-12-09 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: D D Soma; B Zogo; P Taconet; A Somé; S Coulibaly; L Baba-Moussa; G A Ouédraogo; A Koffi; C Pennetier; K R Dabiré; N Moiroux Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-01-30 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Alice Kamau; Moses Musau; Grace Mtanje; Christine Mataza; Philip Bejon; Robert W Snow Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg Date: 2022-10-02 Impact factor: 2.455
Authors: April Monroe; Sarah Moore; Fredros Okumu; Samson Kiware; Neil F Lobo; Hannah Koenker; Ellie Sherrard-Smith; John Gimnig; Gerry F Killeen Journal: Malar J Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 2.979