| Literature DB >> 33066799 |
Jean Baptiste Yaro1,2, Alphonse Ouedraogo1, Z Amidou Ouedraogo1, Amidou Diarra1, Malik Lankouande1, Efundem Agboraw3, Eve Worrall3, Kobié Hyacinthe Toe1, Antoine Sanou1,4, W Moussa Guelbeogo1, N'Fale Sagnon1, Hilary Ranson3, Alfred B Tiono1, Steven W Lindsay2, Anne L Wilson5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Progress in controlling malaria has stalled in recent years. Today the malaria burden is increasingly concentrated in a few countries, including Burkina Faso, where malaria is not declining. A cohort study was conducted to identify risk factors for malaria infection in children in southwest Burkina Faso, an area with high insecticide-treated net (ITN) coverage and insecticide-resistant vectors.Entities:
Keywords: Burkina faso; Cohort study; Epidemiology; Insecticide resistance; Malaria; Vector control
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33066799 PMCID: PMC7565747 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-020-03443-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Study location. a Location of Burkina Faso; b Location of study site in Burkina Faso; c Location of the 10 study villages and Banfora (provincial capital) in study site
Fig. 2Study flowchart
Baseline characteristics of the study cohort
| Characteristic | Number (%) N = 252 |
|---|---|
| Age at enrolment | |
| 5 years to < 8 years | 76 (30.2%) |
| ≥ 8 years | 176 (69.8%) |
| Age (mean/standard deviation) | 9.93 (2.8) |
| Gender | |
| Male | 131 (52.0%) |
| Female | 121 (48.0%) |
| Ethnicity | |
| Gouin | 98 (38.9%) |
| Karaboro | 55 (21.8%) |
| Mossi | 29 (11.5%) |
| Turka | 23 (9.1%) |
| Fulani | 16 (6.3%) |
| Senoufo | 11 (4.4%) |
| Others | 20 (7.9%) |
| Reported bed net use | |
| Used bed net usually | 215 (85.3%) |
| Used a bed net the previous night | 203 (80.6%) |
| Caregiver’s education level | |
| Illiterate | 199 (79.0%) |
| Primary school | 45 (17.9%) |
| Secondary school or above | 8 (3.2%) |
| Caregiver’s occupation | |
| Not working/retired | 6 (2.4%) |
| Farmer | 240 (95.2%) |
| Commercial activities / government officer | 6 (2.4%) |
| Eave status of child’s sleeping room | |
| Closed | 102 (40.5%) |
| Open | 138 (54.8%) |
| Roof material of child’s sleeping room | |
| Metal | 191 (75.8%) |
| Thatch | 34 (13.5%) |
| Other roof type | 18 (7.1%) |
| Wall material of child’s sleeping room | |
| Mud | 65 (25.8%) |
| Brick | 146 (57.9%) |
| Cement (plastered or painted) | 32 (12.7%) |
| Floor material of child’s sleeping room | |
| Cement | 177 (70.2%) |
| Dirt floor | 65 (25.8%) |
| Tiles | 1 (0.4%) |
| Window screening of child’s sleeping room | |
| Absent | 242 (96.0%) |
| Present | 1 (0.4%) |
Fig. 3Mean number of Anopheles gambiae s.l. per trap night in sleeping rooms of study children during the transmission season
Risk factors for Plasmodium infection incidence among children aged 5–15 years in Banfora region of Burkina Faso
| Variables | Number of children | Number of infections | Time at risk (years) | Rate | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IRR (95% CI) | IRR (95% CI) | |||||||
| Age (years) | ||||||||
| 5–7 | 76 | 164 | 31.09 | 5.28 | – | – | ||
| 8–15 | 176 | 386 | 71.40 | 5.41 | 1.02 (0.94–1.12) | 0.59 | ||
| Gender | ||||||||
| Male | 131 | 288 | 52.93 | 5.44 | – | – | ||
| Female | 121 | 262 | 49.56 | 5.29 | 0.97 (0.90–1.05) | 0.46 | ||
| Ethnic group | ||||||||
| Other ethnicity | 236 | 519 | 95.82 | 5.42 | – | – | ||
| Fulani | 16 | 31 | 6.66 | 4.65 | 0.86 (0.65–1.13) | 0.28 | ||
| Caregiver’s education | ||||||||
| Illiterate | 199 | 443 | 80.45 | 5.51 | – | – | ||
| Literate | 53 | 107 | 22.04 | 4.86 | 0.88 (0.76–1.02) | 0.09 | ||
| Caregiver’s occupation | ||||||||
| Farmer | 240 | 523 | 97.39 | 5.37 | – | – | ||
| Non farmer | 12 | 27 | 5.09 | 5.30 | 0.99 (0.83–1.18) | 0.89 | ||
| Religion | ||||||||
| Muslims | 170 | 375 | 68.97 | 5.44 | – | – | ||
| Christians | 33 | 67 | 13.93 | 4.81 | 0.88 (0.77–1.02) | 0.09 | ||
| Animists | 49 | 108 | 19.58 | 5.51 | 1.01 (0.87–1.18) | 0.85 | ||
| SES quintile | ||||||||
| Poorest | 46 | 102 | 20.16 | 5.06 | 1.04 (0.99–1.09) | 0.14 | ||
| Poor | 44 | 95 | 18.47 | 5.14 | ||||
| Middle | 44 | 98 | 18.21 | 5.38 | ||||
| Rich | 46 | 103 | 19.34 | 5.33 | ||||
| Richest | 47 | 106 | 17.79 | 5.96 | ||||
| SES factor score | ||||||||
| 1 unit increase | – | – | – | – | 1.06 (1.01–1.11) | 0.03 | 1.05 (1.00–1.11)* | 0.04 |
| Travel history during the study period | ||||||||
| No | 246 | 537 | 100.93 | 5.32 | – | |||
| Yes | 6 | 13 | 1.55 | 8.39 | 1.58 (1.31–1.90) | < 0.001 | 1.52 (1.45–1.59)$ | < 0.001 |
| Slept under bed net previous night | ||||||||
| Yes | 203 | 448 | 83.55 | 5.36 | – | – | ||
| No | 49 | 102 | 18.93 | 5.39 | 1.00 (0.78–1.29) | 0.97 | ||
| Number of people sleeping in the child room (including child) | ||||||||
| ≤ 6 | 55 | 124 | 23.10 | 5.37 | – | |||
| 6 < no. ≤ 12 | 118 | 265 | 46.32 | 5.72 | 1.07 (0.94–1.21) | 0.33 | ||
| > 12 | 79 | 161 | 33.06 | 4.87 | 0.91 (0.79–1.04) | 0.16 | ||
| Bed net integrity (at final survey in December) | ||||||||
| Good (pHI: 0–64) | 155 | 331 | 62.63 | 5.28 | – | |||
| Damaged (pHI: 65–642) | 36 | 81 | 15.71 | 5.16 | 0.98 (0.83–1.15) | 0.76 | ||
| Too torn (pHI: 643 +) | 58 | 134 | 23.52 | 5.70 | 1.08 (0.97–1.20) | 0.18 | ||
| Used other personal protective measures | ||||||||
| No | 184 | 407 | 74.64 | 5.45 | – | – | ||
| Yes | 58 | 125 | 24.53 | 5.10 | 0.93 (0.81–1.08) | 0.36 | ||
| Housing: roof of child’s sleeping room | ||||||||
| Metal | 191 | 420 | 77.60 | 5.41 | – | |||
| Non metal | 52 | 114 | 21.85 | 5.22 | 0.96 (0.85–1.09) | 0.57 | ||
| Housing: floor of the child’s sleeping room | ||||||||
| Cement/tiles | 178 | 388 | 72.91 | 5.32 | – | – | ||
| Dirt | 65 | 146 | 26.54 | 5.50 | 1.03 (0.94–1.13) | 0.48 | ||
| Housing: wall of the child’s sleeping room | ||||||||
| Mud | 65 | 151 | 26.54 | 5.69 | – | – | ||
| Brick | 146 | 309 | 59.15 | 5.22 | 0.92 (0.83–1.02) | 0.12 | ||
| Cement | 32 | 74 | 13.77 | 5.37 | 0.94 (0.83–1.08) | 0.39 | ||
| Housing: eaves of the child’s sleeping room | ||||||||
| Open | 138 | 299 | 56.57 | 5.29 | – | |||
| Closed | 102 | 229 | 41.60 | 5.51 | 1.04 (0.91–1.20) | 0.57 | ||
| Cows, horses, sheep or goats within 5 m of child’s home | ||||||||
| Present | 169 | 371 | 67.80 | 5.47 | – | |||
| Absent | 80 | 174 | 33.51 | 5.19 | 0.95 (0.83–1.09) | 0.46 | ||
| Euclidean distance to the nearest positive aquatic habitat | ||||||||
| < = 300 m | 127 | 266 | 51.76 | 5.14 | – | – | ||
| > 300 m | 125 | 284 | 50.72 | 5.60 | 1.09 (1.00–1.19) | 0.06 | ||
| Distance by road to nearest health centre | ||||||||
| < = 2 km | 119 | 252 | 49.65 | 5.08 | – | – | ||
| > 2 km | 133 | 298 | 52.83 | 5.64 | 1.11 (1.00–1.24) | 0.06 | ||
| EIR (village-level) | ||||||||
| - | – | – | – | 1.00 (1.00–1.00) | 0.08 | |||
| % mortality in WHO tube test with 0.05% deltamethrin diagnostic dose | ||||||||
| - | – | – | – | – | 1.05 (0.73–1.50) | 0.79 | ||
IRR incidence rate ratio, *IRR adjusted for travel history, $IRR adjusted for SES factor score