Do topical repellents divert mosquitoes within a community? Health equity implications of topical repellents as a mosquito bite prevention tool.

OBJECTIVES: Repellents do not kill mosquitoes--they simply reduce human-vector contact. Thus it is possible that individuals who do not use repellents but dwell close to repellent users experience more bites than otherwise. The objective of this study was to measure if diversion occurs from households that use repellents to those that do not use repellents. METHODS: The study was performed in three Tanzanian villages using 15%-DEET and placebo lotions. All households were given LLINs. Three coverage scenarios were investigated: complete coverage (all households were given 15%-DEET), incomplete coverage (80% of households were given 15%-DEET and 20% placebo) and no coverage (all households were given placebo). A crossover study design was used and coverage scenarios were rotated weekly over a period of ten weeks. The placebo lotion was randomly allocated to households in the incomplete coverage scenario. The level of compliance was reported to be close to 100%. Mosquito densities were measured through aspiration of resting mosquitoes. Data were analysed using negative binomial regression models. FINDINGS: Repellent-users had consistently fewer mosquitoes in their dwellings. In villages where everybody had been given 15%-DEET, resting mosquito densities were fewer than half that of households in the no coverage scenario (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR]=0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.60); p<0.001). Placebo-users living in a village where 80% of the households used 15%-DEET were likely to have over four-times more mosquitoes (IRR=4.17; 95% CI: 3.08-5.65; p<0.001) resting in their dwellings in comparison to households in a village where nobody uses repellent. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that high coverage of repellent use could significantly reduce man-vector contact but with incomplete coverage evidence suggests that mosquitoes are diverted from households that use repellent to those that do not. Therefore, if repellents are to be considered for vector control, strategies to maximise coverage are required

Advantages and Limitations of Commercially Available Electrocuting Grids for Studying Mosquito Behaviour.

Mosquito feeding behaviour plays a major role in determining malaria transmission intensity and the impact of specific prevention measures. Human Landing Catch (HLC) is currently the only method that can directly and consistently measure the biting rates of anthropophagic mosquitoes, both indoors and outdoors. However, this method exposes the participant to mosquito-borne pathogens, therefore new exposure-free methods are needed to replace it. Commercially available electrocuting grids (EGs) were evaluated as an alternative to HLC using a Latin Square experimental design in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Both HLC and EGs were used to estimate the proportion of human exposure to mosquitoes occurring indoors (πi), as well as its two underlying parameters: the proportion of mosquitoes caught indoors (Pi) and the proportion of mosquitoes caught between the first and last hour when most people are indoors (Pfl). HLC and EGs methods accounted for 69% and 31% of the total number of female mosquitoes caught respectively and both methods caught more mosquitoes outdoors than indoors. Results from the gold standard HLC suggest that An. gambiae s.s. in Dar es Salaam is neither exophagic nor endophagic (Pi ≈ 0.5), whereas An. arabiensis is exophagic (Pi < < 0.5). Both species prefer to feed after 10 pm when most people are indoors (Pfl > >0.5). EGs yielded estimates of Pi for An. gambiae s.s., An. arabiensis and An. coustani, that were approximately equivalent to those with HLC but significantly underestimated Pfl for An. gambiae s.s. and An. coustani. The relative sampling sensitivity of EGs declined over the course of the night (p ≤ 0.001) for all mosquito taxa except An. arabiensis. Commercial EGs sample human-seeking mosquitoes with high sensitivity both indoors and outdoors and accurately measure the propensity of Anopheles malaria vectors to bite indoors rather than outdoors. However, further modifications are needed to stabilize sampling sensitivity over a full nocturnal cycle so that they can be used to survey patterns of human exposure to mosquitoes

Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis

Meta-analysis is the quantitative, scientific synthesis of research results. Since the term and modern approaches to research synthesis were first introduced in the 1970s, meta-analysis has had a revolutionary effect in many scientific fields, helping to establish evidence-based practice and to resolve seemingly contradictory research outcomes. At the same time, its implementation has engendered criticism and controversy, in some cases general and others specific to particular disciplines. Here we take the opportunity provided by the recent fortieth anniversary of meta-analysis to reflect on the accomplishments, limitations, recent advances and directions for future developments in the field of research synthesis

Malaria transmission after five years of vector control on Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea.

BACKGROUND: Malaria is endemic with year-round transmission on Bioko Island. The Bioko Island Malaria Control Project (BIMCP) started in 2004 with the aim to reduce malaria transmission and to ultimately eliminate malaria. While the project has been successful in reducing overall malaria morbidity and mortality, foci of high malaria transmission still persist on the island. Results from the 2009 entomological collections are reported here. METHODS: Human landing collections (HLC) and light trap collections (LTC) were carried out on Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea in 2009. The HLCs were performed in three locations every second month and LTCs were carried out in 10 locations every second week. Molecular analyses were performed to identify species, detect sporozoites, and identify potential insecticide resistance alleles. RESULTS: The entomological inoculation rates (EIR) on Bioko Island ranged from 163 to 840, with the outdoor EIRs reaching > 900 infective mosquito bites per year. All three human landing collection sites on Bioko Island had an annual EIR exceeding the calculated African average of 121 infective bites per year. The highest recorded EIRs were in Punta Europa in northwestern Bioko Island with human biting rates of 92 and 66 mosquito landings per person per night, outdoors and indoors, respectively. Overall, the propensity for mosquito biting on the island was significantly higher outdoors than indoors (p < 0.001). Both Anopheles gambiae s.s. and An. melas were responsible for malaria transmission on the island, but with different geographical distribution patterns. Sporozoite rates were the highest in An. gambiae s.s. populations ranging from 3.1% in Punta Europa and 5.7% in Riaba in the southeast. Only the L1014F (kdr-west) insecticide resistance mutation was detected on the island with frequencies ranging from 22-88% in An. gambiae s.s. No insecticide resistance alleles were detected in the An. melas populations. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of five years of extensive malaria control and a generalized reduction in the force of transmission, parasite prevalence and child mortality, foci of very high transmission persist on Bioko Island, particularly in the northwestern Punta Europa area. This area is favorable for anopheline mosquito breeding; human biting rates are high, and the EIRs are among the highest ever recorded. Both vector species collected in the study have a propensity to bite outdoors more frequently than indoors. Despite current vector control efforts mosquito densities remain high in such foci of high malaria transmission. To further reduce transmission, indoor residual spraying (IRS) needs to be supplemented with additional vector control interventions