Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Characterizing, controlling and eliminating residual malaria transmission

Malaria Journal

BioMed Central

Malaria, Residual transmission, Vector control, Anopheles, Mosquito, Elimination

Read this article at

Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) interventions can reduce malaria transmission by targeting mosquitoes when they feed upon sleeping humans and/or rest inside houses, livestock shelters or other man-made structures. However, many malaria vector species can maintain robust transmission, despite high coverage of LLINs/IRS containing insecticides to which they are physiologically fully susceptible, because they exhibit one or more behaviours that define the biological limits of achievable impact with these interventions: (1) Natural or insecticide-induced avoidance of contact with treated surfaces within houses and early exit from them, thus minimizing exposure hazard of vectors which feed indoors upon humans; (2) Feeding upon humans when they are active and unprotected outdoors, thereby attenuating personal protection and any consequent community-wide suppression of transmission; (3) Feeding upon animals, thus minimizing contact with insecticides targeted at humans or houses; (4) Resting outdoors, away from insecticide-treated surfaces of nets, walls and roofs. Residual malaria transmission is, therefore, defined as all forms of transmission that can persist after achieving full universal coverage with effective LLINs and/or IRS containing active ingredients to which local vector populations are fully susceptible. Residual transmission is sufficiently intense across most of the tropics to render malaria elimination infeasible without new or improved vector control methods. Many novel or improved vector control strategies to address residual transmission are emerging that either: (1) Enhance control of adult vectors that enter houses to feed and/or rest by killing, repelling or excluding them; (2) Kill or repel adult mosquitoes when they attack people outdoors; (3) Kill adult mosquitoes when they attack livestock; (4) Kill adult mosquitoes when they feed upon sugar or; (5) Kill immature mosquitoes in aquatic habitats. To date, none of these options has sufficient supporting evidence to justify full-scale programmatic implementation. Concerted investment in their rigorous selection, development and evaluation is required over the coming decade to enable control and, ultimately, elimination of residual malaria transmission. In the meantime, national programmes may assess options for addressing residual transmission under programmatic conditions through pilot studies with strong monitoring, evaluation and operational research components, similar to the Onchocerciasis Control Programme.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 150

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Pyrethroid resistance in African anopheline mosquitoes: what are the implications for malaria control?

      The use of pyrethroid insecticides in malaria vector control has increased dramatically in the past decade through the scale up of insecticide treated net distribution programmes and indoor residual spraying campaigns. Inevitably, the major malaria vectors have developed resistance to these insecticides and the resistance alleles are spreading at an exceptionally rapid rate throughout Africa. Although substantial progress has been made on understanding the causes of pyrethroid resistance, remarkably few studies have focused on the epidemiological impact of resistance on current malaria control activities. As we move into the malaria eradication era, it is vital that the implications of insecticide resistance are understood and strategies to mitigate these effects are implemented. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        Insecticide-treated bed nets and curtains for preventing malaria.

         C Lengeler (2003)
        Malaria is an important cause of illness and death in many parts of the world, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. There has been a renewed emphasis on preventive measures at community and individual levels. Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are the most prominent malaria preventive measure for large-scale deployment in highly endemic areas. To assess the impact of insecticide-treated bed nets or curtains on mortality, malarial illness (life-threatening and mild), malaria parasitaemia, anaemia, and spleen rates. I searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group trials register (January 2003), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2003), EMBASE (1974 to November 2002), LILACS (1982 to January 2003), and reference lists of reviews, books, and trials. I handsearched journals, contacted researchers, funding agencies, and net and insecticide manufacturers. Individual and cluster randomized controlled trials of insecticide-treated bed nets or curtains compared to nets without insecticide or no nets. Trials including only pregnant women were excluded. The reviewer and two independent assessors reviewed trials for inclusion. The reviewer assessed trial methodological quality and extracted and analysed data. Fourteen cluster randomized and eight individually randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Five trials measured child mortality: ITNs provided 17% protective efficacy (PE) compared to no nets (relative rate 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.90), and 23% PE compared to untreated nets (relative rate 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.95). About 5.5 lives (95% CI 3.39 to 7.67) can be saved each year for every 1000 children protected with ITNs. In areas with stable malaria, ITNs reduced the incidence of uncomplicated malarial episodes in areas of stable malaria by 50% compared to no nets, and 39% compared to untreated nets; and in areas of unstable malaria: by 62% for compared to no nets and 43% compared to untreated nets for Plasmodium falciparum episodes, and by 52% compared to no nets and 11% compared to untreated nets for P. vivax episodes. When compared to no nets and in areas of stable malaria, ITNs also had an impact on severe malaria (45% PE, 95% CI 20 to 63), parasite prevalence (13% PE), high parasitaemia (29% PE), splenomegaly (30% PE), and their use improved the average haemoglobin level in children by 1.7% packed cell volume. ITNs are highly effective in reducing childhood mortality and morbidity from malaria. Widespread access to ITNs is currently being advocated by Roll Back Malaria, but universal deployment will require major financial, technical, and operational inputs.
          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Increased proportions of outdoor feeding among residual malaria vector populations following increased use of insecticide-treated nets in rural Tanzania

          Background Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) represent the front-line tools for malaria vector control globally, but are optimally effective where the majority of baseline transmission occurs indoors. In the surveyed area of rural southern Tanzania, bed net use steadily increased over the last decade, reducing malaria transmission intensity by 94%. Methods Starting before bed nets were introduced (1997), and then after two milestones of net use had been reached-75% community-wide use of untreated nets (2004) and then 47% use of ITNs (2009)-hourly biting rates of malaria vectors from the Anopheles gambiae complex and Anopheles funestus group were surveyed. Results In 1997, An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus mosquitoes exhibited a tendency to bite humans inside houses late at night. For An. gambiae s.l., by 2009, nocturnal activity was less (p = 0.0018). At this time, the sibling species composition of the complex had shifted from predominantly An. gambiae s.s. to predominantly An. arabiensis. For An. funestus, by 2009, nocturnal activity was less (p = 0.0054) as well as the proportion biting indoors (p < 0.0001). At this time, An. funestus s.s. remained the predominant species within this group. As a consequence of these altered feeding patterns, the proportion (mean ± standard error) of human contact with mosquitoes (bites per person per night) occurring indoors dropped from 0.99 ± 0.002 in 1997 to 0.82 ± 0.008 in 2009 for the An. gambiae complex (p = 0.0143) and from 1.00 ± <0.001 to only 0.50 ± 0.048 for the An. funestus complex (p = 0.0004) over the same time period. Conclusions High usage of ITNs can dramatically alter African vector populations so that intense, predominantly indoor transmission is replaced by greatly lowered residual transmission, a greater proportion of which occurs outdoors. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, the residual, self-sustaining transmission will respond poorly to further insecticidal measures within houses. Additional vector control tools which target outdoor biting mosquitoes at the adult or immature stages are required to complement ITNs and IRS.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [ ]Ifakara Health Institute, Environmental Health and Ecological Sciences Thematic Group, Ifakara, Morogoro United Republic of Tanzania
            [ ]Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Vector Biology Department, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, UK
            Contributors
            gkilleen@ihi.or.tz
            Journal
            Malar J
            Malar. J
            Malaria Journal
            BioMed Central (London )
            1475-2875
            23 August 2014
            23 August 2014
            2014
            : 13
            : 1
            25149656
            4159526
            3369
            10.1186/1475-2875-13-330
            © Killeen; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

            This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

            Categories
            Review
            Custom metadata
            © The Author(s) 2014

            Comments

            Comment on this article