Timothy A Burton, Lepa Syahrani, Dendi Hadi Permana, Ismail Ekoprayitno Rozi, Rifqi Risandi, Siti Zubaidah, Syarifah Zulfah, Ma'as M Maloha, Rusli Efendi, Maria Kristiana, Puji B S Asih, Din Syafruddin, Neil F Lobo
{"title":"在印度尼西亚苏门答腊岛的一个临时避难所,跨氟菊酯喷雾器和经杀虫剂处理的屏障屏障在减少按蚊叮咬方面的有效性。","authors":"Timothy A Burton, Lepa Syahrani, Dendi Hadi Permana, Ismail Ekoprayitno Rozi, Rifqi Risandi, Siti Zubaidah, Syarifah Zulfah, Ma'as M Maloha, Rusli Efendi, Maria Kristiana, Puji B S Asih, Din Syafruddin, Neil F Lobo","doi":"10.1186/s12936-025-05285-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The World Health Organization-approved Anopheles interventions target indoor biting and resting behaviour, but are impractical or inapplicable in some settings. In Jambi Province, Sumatra, Indonesia, local indigenous populations sleep under temporary tarpaulin-roofed shelters, complicating the use of bed nets and preventing the application of indoor residual spraying. Two pyrethroid-based interventions were tested alongside a no-intervention control in the field using a Latin-square design. A volatile pyrethroid spatial emanator (SE) offers an easily deployable, simple to use intervention utilizing transfluthrin, while deltamethrin-impregnated barrier screens represents a more permanent intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Human landing collection was used for mosquito collections throughout the study. Collections occurred near Bukit Duabelas National Park in central Sumatra, Indonesia, an area characterized by secondary forest undergoing widespread conversion to palm and rubber plantations. Collections occurred in three sites located roughly 150 m from each other, with a Latin-square rotational design to account for location and collector effects between experimental replicates. Three complete rotations were achieved over 27 collection nights (a total of 81 trap-nights). Results were analysed with a series of generalized linear models to analyse overall efficacy and the influence of location and device age.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anopheles host-seeking activity was reduced in the presence of the SE (RR: 0.30 [0.21-0.43], p < 0.001) and barrier screen (RR: 0.39 [0.28-0.54], p < 0.001) interventions compared to control shelters over the course of the study. Similar efficacy was observed among non-Anopheles species. Hourly differences in behaviour were observed, and device age and location were both significant predictors of efficacy in univariate analyses, with efficacy appearing to decrease with device age. However, it was not possible to differentiate between the device age and location effects, since they were correlated due to an error in the rotational design.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both interventions appeared to reduce Anopheles and non-Anopheles mosquito host-seeking behaviour, highlighting the potential of these forms of outdoor mosquito control. Considerable variation was observed between collection locations, highlighting a difficulty in study design and entomological forecasting. Due to the rotational design where the device age correlated with location, it was difficult to disentangle the relative contributions of these factors. Passive SEs and insecticide-impregnated barrier screens represent interventions that may reduce exposure and hence transmission outdoors.</p>","PeriodicalId":18317,"journal":{"name":"Malaria Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":"112"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of a transfluthrin emanator and insecticide-treated barrier screen in reducing Anopheles biting in a temporary shelter in Sumatra, Indonesia.\",\"authors\":\"Timothy A Burton, Lepa Syahrani, Dendi Hadi Permana, Ismail Ekoprayitno Rozi, Rifqi Risandi, Siti Zubaidah, Syarifah Zulfah, Ma'as M Maloha, Rusli Efendi, Maria Kristiana, Puji B S Asih, Din Syafruddin, Neil F Lobo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12936-025-05285-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The World Health Organization-approved Anopheles interventions target indoor biting and resting behaviour, but are impractical or inapplicable in some settings. In Jambi Province, Sumatra, Indonesia, local indigenous populations sleep under temporary tarpaulin-roofed shelters, complicating the use of bed nets and preventing the application of indoor residual spraying. Two pyrethroid-based interventions were tested alongside a no-intervention control in the field using a Latin-square design. A volatile pyrethroid spatial emanator (SE) offers an easily deployable, simple to use intervention utilizing transfluthrin, while deltamethrin-impregnated barrier screens represents a more permanent intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Human landing collection was used for mosquito collections throughout the study. Collections occurred near Bukit Duabelas National Park in central Sumatra, Indonesia, an area characterized by secondary forest undergoing widespread conversion to palm and rubber plantations. Collections occurred in three sites located roughly 150 m from each other, with a Latin-square rotational design to account for location and collector effects between experimental replicates. Three complete rotations were achieved over 27 collection nights (a total of 81 trap-nights). Results were analysed with a series of generalized linear models to analyse overall efficacy and the influence of location and device age.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anopheles host-seeking activity was reduced in the presence of the SE (RR: 0.30 [0.21-0.43], p < 0.001) and barrier screen (RR: 0.39 [0.28-0.54], p < 0.001) interventions compared to control shelters over the course of the study. Similar efficacy was observed among non-Anopheles species. Hourly differences in behaviour were observed, and device age and location were both significant predictors of efficacy in univariate analyses, with efficacy appearing to decrease with device age. However, it was not possible to differentiate between the device age and location effects, since they were correlated due to an error in the rotational design.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both interventions appeared to reduce Anopheles and non-Anopheles mosquito host-seeking behaviour, highlighting the potential of these forms of outdoor mosquito control. Considerable variation was observed between collection locations, highlighting a difficulty in study design and entomological forecasting. Due to the rotational design where the device age correlated with location, it was difficult to disentangle the relative contributions of these factors. Passive SEs and insecticide-impregnated barrier screens represent interventions that may reduce exposure and hence transmission outdoors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Malaria Journal\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Malaria Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05285-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaria Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05285-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:世界卫生组织批准的按蚊干预措施以室内叮咬和休息行为为目标,但在某些情况下不切实际或无法适用。在印度尼西亚苏门答腊岛占碑省,当地土著居民睡在临时搭建的防水油布顶棚下,这使蚊帐的使用变得复杂,也阻碍了室内滞留喷洒的应用。我们采用拉丁方形设计,在实地测试了两种以拟除虫菊酯为基础的干预措施,以及一种无干预措施对照组。挥发性拟除虫菊酯空间发射器(SE)利用氟氯氰菊酯提供了一种易于部署、使用简单的干预措施,而溴氰菊酯浸渍的屏障纱窗则是一种更持久的干预措施。采集地点位于印度尼西亚苏门答腊岛中部的布吉特-杜阿贝拉斯国家公园附近,该地区的特点是次生林正被广泛改造为棕榈和橡胶种植园。采集工作在三个相距约 150 米的地点进行,采用拉丁方形轮换设计,以考虑实验重复之间的位置和采集者效应。在 27 个采集夜(共 81 个诱捕夜)中进行了三次完整的轮换。通过一系列广义线性模型对结果进行了分析,以分析总体效果以及地点和装置年龄的影响:结果:在有 SE 存在的情况下,疟蚊寻找宿主的活动减少了(RR:0.30 [0.21-0.43],p 结论:在有 SE 存在的情况下,疟蚊寻找宿主的活动减少了:这两种干预措施似乎都减少了按蚊和非按蚊寻找宿主的行为,突出了这些户外蚊虫控制形式的潜力。采集地点之间存在很大差异,这说明研究设计和昆虫学预测存在困难。由于采用轮换设计,装置的使用年限与地点相关,因此很难区分这些因素的相对贡献。被动式杀虫剂和浸渍杀虫剂的屏障纱窗是一种干预措施,可减少接触,从而减少户外传播。
Effectiveness of a transfluthrin emanator and insecticide-treated barrier screen in reducing Anopheles biting in a temporary shelter in Sumatra, Indonesia.
Background: The World Health Organization-approved Anopheles interventions target indoor biting and resting behaviour, but are impractical or inapplicable in some settings. In Jambi Province, Sumatra, Indonesia, local indigenous populations sleep under temporary tarpaulin-roofed shelters, complicating the use of bed nets and preventing the application of indoor residual spraying. Two pyrethroid-based interventions were tested alongside a no-intervention control in the field using a Latin-square design. A volatile pyrethroid spatial emanator (SE) offers an easily deployable, simple to use intervention utilizing transfluthrin, while deltamethrin-impregnated barrier screens represents a more permanent intervention.
Methods: Human landing collection was used for mosquito collections throughout the study. Collections occurred near Bukit Duabelas National Park in central Sumatra, Indonesia, an area characterized by secondary forest undergoing widespread conversion to palm and rubber plantations. Collections occurred in three sites located roughly 150 m from each other, with a Latin-square rotational design to account for location and collector effects between experimental replicates. Three complete rotations were achieved over 27 collection nights (a total of 81 trap-nights). Results were analysed with a series of generalized linear models to analyse overall efficacy and the influence of location and device age.
Results: Anopheles host-seeking activity was reduced in the presence of the SE (RR: 0.30 [0.21-0.43], p < 0.001) and barrier screen (RR: 0.39 [0.28-0.54], p < 0.001) interventions compared to control shelters over the course of the study. Similar efficacy was observed among non-Anopheles species. Hourly differences in behaviour were observed, and device age and location were both significant predictors of efficacy in univariate analyses, with efficacy appearing to decrease with device age. However, it was not possible to differentiate between the device age and location effects, since they were correlated due to an error in the rotational design.
Conclusions: Both interventions appeared to reduce Anopheles and non-Anopheles mosquito host-seeking behaviour, highlighting the potential of these forms of outdoor mosquito control. Considerable variation was observed between collection locations, highlighting a difficulty in study design and entomological forecasting. Due to the rotational design where the device age correlated with location, it was difficult to disentangle the relative contributions of these factors. Passive SEs and insecticide-impregnated barrier screens represent interventions that may reduce exposure and hence transmission outdoors.
期刊介绍:
Malaria Journal is aimed at the scientific community interested in malaria in its broadest sense. It is the only journal that publishes exclusively articles on malaria and, as such, it aims to bring together knowledge from the different specialities involved in this very broad discipline, from the bench to the bedside and to the field.