Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Malaria control in Africa relies extensively on indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs). IRS typically targets mosquitoes resting on walls, and in few cases, roofs and ceilings, using contact insecticides. Unfortunately, little attention is paid to where malaria vectors actually rest indoors, and how such knowledge could be used to improve IRS. This study investigated preferred resting surfaces of two major malaria vectors, Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis , inside four common house types in rural south-eastern Tanzania. Methods The assessment was done inside 80 houses including: 20 with thatched roofs and mud walls, 20 with thatched roofs and un-plastered brick walls, 20 with metal roofs and un-plastered brick walls, and 20 with metal roofs and plastered brick walls, across four villages. In each house, resting mosquitoes were sampled in mornings (6 a.m.–8 a.m.), evenings (6 p.m.–8 p.m.) and at night (11 p.m.–12.00 a.m.) using Prokopack aspirators from multiple surfaces (walls, undersides of roofs, floors, furniture, utensils, clothing, curtains and bed nets). Results Overall, only 26% of An. funestus and 18% of An. arabiensis were found on walls. In grass-thatched houses, 33–55% of An. funestus and 43–50% of An. arabiensis rested under roofs, while in metal-roofed houses, only 16–20% of An. funestus and 8–30% of An. arabiensis rested under roofs. Considering all data together, approximately 40% of mosquitoes rested on surfaces not typically targeted by IRS, i.e. floors, furniture, utensils, clothing and bed nets. These proportions were particularly high in metal-roofed houses (47–53% of An. funestus ; 60–66% of An. arabiensis ). Conclusion While IRS typically uses contact insecticides to target adult mosquitoes on walls, and occasionally roofs and ceilings, significant proportions of vectors rest on surfaces not usually sprayed. This gap exceeds one-third of malaria mosquitoes in grass-thatched houses, and can reach two-thirds in metal-roofed houses. Where field operations exclude roofs during IRS, the gaps can be much greater. In conclusion, there is need for locally-obtained data on mosquito resting behaviours and how these influence the overall impact and costs of IRS. This study also emphasizes the need for alternative approaches, e.g. house screening, which broadly tackle mosquitoes beyond areas reachable by IRS and ITNs.

Background Access to long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) has increased and malaria has decreased globally, but malaria transmission remains high in parts of sub-Saharan Africa and insecticide resistance threatens current progress. Eave tubes are a new tool for the targeted delivery of insecticides against mosquitoes attempting to enter houses. The primary objective of this trial is to test whether screening plus eave tubes (SET) provides protection against malaria, on top of universal coverage with LLINs in an area of intense pyrethroid resistance. The trial will also assess acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Methods/design A two-armed, cluster randomized controlled trial will be conducted to evaluate the effect of SET on clinical malaria incidence in children living in central Côte d’Ivoire. Forty villages will be selected based on population size and the proportion of houses suitable for modification with SET. Using restricted randomization, half the villages will be assigned to the treatment arm (SET + LLINs) and the remainder will be assigned to the control arm (LLINs only). In both arms, LLINs will be distributed and in the treatment arm, householders will be offered SET. Fifty children aged six months to eight years old will be enrolled from randomly selected households in each of the 40 villages. Cohorts will be cleared of malaria parasites at the start of the study and one year after recruitment, and will be monitored for clinical malaria case incidence by active case detection over two years. Mosquito densities will be assessed using CDC light traps and human landing catches and a subset of Anopheles mosquitoes will be examined for parity status and tested for sporozoite infection. Acceptability of SET will be monitored using surveys and focus groups. Cost-effectiveness analysis will measure the incremental cost per case averted and per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted of adding SET to LLINs. Economic and financial costs will be estimated from societal and provider perspective using standard economic evaluation methods. Discussion This study will be the first evaluation of the epidemiological impact of SET. Trial findings will show whether SET is a viable, cost-effective technology for malaria control in Côte d’Ivoire and possibly elsewhere. Trial registration ISRCTN18145556 , registered on 01 February 2017 – retrospectively registered.

Background House screening remains conspicuously absent in national malaria programs despite its recognition by the World Health Organization as a supplementary malaria vector-control intervention. This may be attributed, in part, to the knowledge gap in screen durability or longevity in local climatic conditions and community acceptance under specific cultural practices and socio-economic contexts. The objectives of this study were to assess the durability of window and door wire mesh screens a year after full house screening and to assess the acceptability of the house screening intervention to the participants involved. Methods This study was conducted in Nyimba district, Zambia and used both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection and analysis. Both direct observation and questionnaires were employed to assess the durability of the screens and the main reasons for damage. Findings on damage were summarized as percentages. Focus group discussions were used to assess people’s knowledge, perceptions, and acceptability of the closing eaves and house screening intervention. Deductive coding and inductive coding were used to analyse the qualitative data. Results A total of 321 out of 400 (80.3%) household owners of screened houses were interviewed. Many window screens (90.3%) were intact. In sharp contrast, most door screens were torn ( n  = 150; 46.7%) or entirely removed ( n  = 55; 17.1%). Most doors ( n  = 114; 76%) had their wire mesh damaged or removed on the bottom half. Goats (25.4%), rust (17.6%) and children (17.1%) were cited most as the cause of damage to door screens. The focus group discussion elicited positive experiences from the participants following the closing of eaves and screening of their windows and doors, ranging from sleeping peacefully due to reduced mosquito biting and/or nuisance and having fewer insects in the house. Participants linked house screening to reduced malaria in their households and community. Conclusion This study demonstrated that in rural south-east Zambia, closing eaves and screening windows and doors was widely accepted. Participants perceived that house screening reduced human-vector contact, reduced the malaria burden and nuisance biting from other potentially disease carrying insects. However, screened doors are prone to damage, mainly by children, domestic animals, rust, and termites.

Background Providing protection from malaria vector bites, both indoors and outdoors, is crucial to curbing malaria parasite transmission. Screening of house entry points, especially with incorporated insecticides, confers significant protection but remains a costly and labour-intensive application. Use of spatial repellents has shown promise in creating areas of protection in peri-domestic areas. Methods This study aimed at comparing the protection provided by transfluthrin-treated and untreated complete screens over open eave gaps with incomplete transfluthrin-treated eave strips as a potential replacement for a full screen. Human landing catches were implemented independently inside and outside an experimental hut under controlled semi-field conditions, with insectary-reared Anopheles arabiensis mosquitoes. Results The odds of a female mosquito finding a human volunteer indoors and attempting to bite were similar whether the eaves were completely open or there was an untreated fabric strip fixed around the eaves. However, when the eave gap was completely screened without insecticide, the odds of receiving a bite indoors were reduced by 70% (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20–0.47). Adding transfluthrin to the full screen, further increased the protection indoors, with the odds of receiving a bite reduced by 92% (0.08, 95% CI 0.04–0.16) compared to the untreated screen. Importantly, the same protection was conferred when only a narrow transfluthrin-treated fabric strip was loosely fixed around the eave gap (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.04–0.13). The impact of the transfluthrin treatment on outdoor biting was correlated with evening temperatures during the experiments. At lower evening temperatures, a transfluthrin-treated, complete screen provided moderate and variable protection from bites (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.37–1.03), whilst at higher evening temperatures the odds of receiving a bite outdoors was over four times lower in the presence of transfluthrin, on either a full screen (OR 0.22 95% 0.12–0.38) or a fabric strip (OR 0.25, 95% 0.15–0.42), than when no treatment was present. Conclusion The findings suggest that transfluthrin-treated fabric strips can provide a substitute for complete eave screens. They are a simple, easy-to-handle tool for protecting people from malaria mosquito bites indoors and potentially around the house in climatic areas where evening and night-time temperatures are relatively high.

Background The combined application of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are commonly used malaria interventions that target indoor Anopheles vectors. Recent studies on the effects of house screening (HS) and LLINs have demonstrated a reduction in indoor vector densities and malaria when the interventions are combined. In addition, complementary interventions are needed to curb co-occurring pest populations which pose menace to agricultural crop productivity and food security. However, interventions that impact malaria mainly centre on public health strategies, overlooking subtle but important component of agricultural measures. Addressing the coexisting risks of malaria and crop pests could contribute to improved livelihood of communities. Methods A four-armed household, cluster-randomized, controlled study will be conducted to assess the combined impact of HS, LLINs and push-pull agricultural technology (PPT) against clinical malaria in children in Ethiopia. The unit of randomization will be the household, which includes a house and its occupants. A total of 838 households will be enrolled in this study. In this trial 246 households will receive LLINs and HS, 250 will receive LLINs, HS and PPT, 175 households will receive LLINs and PPT. The remaining 167 houses which receive LLINs only will be used as control. One child aged ≤14 years will be enrolled per household in each treatment and followed for clinical malaria using active case detection to estimate malaria incidence for two malaria transmission seasons. Discussion Episodes of clinical malaria, density of indoor biting malaria vectors, sporozoite infection rate, improved crop infestation rate, crop yield gain, livestock productivity and cost effectiveness analysis will be the end points of this study. Socio-economic, social demographic, cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted using qualitative and participatory methods to explore the acceptability of HS and PPT. Documenting the combined impact of LLINs, HS and PPT on the prevalence of clinical malaria and crop pest damage will be the first of its kind. Trial registration Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202006878245287. 24/06/2020. https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=11101 .

Background The World Health Organization recommends house screening as a tool for malaria control, yet evidence of the long-term durability, functionality and acceptability of this intervention is lacking. In this study, the sustainability and use of novel types of screened doors and windows was examined 4 years after installation in a Gambian village. Methods A survey of 31 houses, each with two screened doors and two screened windows, was conducted in the rainy season. There were four types of screened door and two types of screened window. Trained staff carried out the survey and interviews of room owners were conducted in the local language before translation into English. Results Structurally, the manufactured doors and windows were highly durable and in excellent condition. Most doors shut smoothly 50/61 (82%), although only 25/61 (41%) shut fully automatically with the latch slotting into the hole on the frame and holding fast. Door locks were less robust, with only (24/61) 39% present and working. Blinds proved especially flimsy, with only 4/109 (4%) of door blinds and 10/56 (18%) of window blinds present and in working order. Householders hung curtains inside most doors 50/61 (82%) and in 26/61 (43%) of the windows. Front doors were commonly found propped open 21/31 (68%) and 23/27 (85%) of those with a front door curtain, put their curtains down at night. Doors and windows were well liked, 19/31 (61%) of respondents were happy with them because they kept mosquitoes out 14/31 (45%) and provided security 12/31 (39%). The main reason given for the use of curtains was to provide privacy 26/28 (93% of those with curtains), especially while the door was open or had ‘see-through’ panels. Conclusions Overall, the screened doors and windows were in full-working order and undamaged after 4 years of use. The doors and windows were well liked, especially for their ability to reduce the entry of mosquitoes and for the security they afforded. Improvements to the lock design are needed before scale-up. Most householders hung curtains behind their doors for privacy. Installation of screening in buildings should be accompanied with recommendations that at night, when doors and windows are closed, curtains be lifted or drawn to one side—to improve ventilation and keep the house cool.

Background Traditional rural housing in hot, humid regions of sub-Saharan Africa usually consists of single-level, poorly ventilated dwellings. Houses are mostly poorly screened against malaria mosquitoes and limited airflow discourages the use of bednets resulting in high indoor transmission. This study aims to determine whether living in a novel design house with elevated bedrooms and permeable screened walls reduces malaria, respiratory tract infections, and diarrhoea among children in rural Tanzania. Methods/study design This is a household-randomized, controlled study in 60 villages in Mtwara, Tanzania. A total of 550 households are randomly selected, 110 of which are allocated a novel design house and 440 households continue to reside in traditional houses. A dynamic cohort of about 1650 children under 13 years will be enrolled and followed for 3 years, approximately 330 living in novel design houses and 1320 in traditional rural houses. The primary endpoint is the incidence of malaria; secondary endpoints are incidences of acute respiratory tract infections and diarrhoea diseases detected by passive and active surveillance. Exposure to malaria vectors will be assessed using light traps in all study houses. Structural, economic, and social science studies will assess the durability, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability of the new houses compared with traditional housing. Environmental data will be collected indoors and outdoors in study homes to assess the differences between house typologies. Discussion This is the first randomized controlled trial to assess the protective efficacy of a new house design targeting malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. The findings of this study could influence the future construction of homes in hot and humid zones of Africa. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529434 . Registered on August 27, 2020

Fitting long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) as screens on doors/windows has a significant impact on indoor-adult Aedes aegypti (L.), with entomological reductions measured in a previous study being significant for up to 2 yr post-installation, even in the presence of pyrethroid-resistant Aedes populations. To better understand the mode of LLIN protection, bioassays were performed to evaluate the effects of field deployment (0, 6, and 12 mo) and damage type (none, central, lateral, and multiple) on LLIN efficacy. Contact bioassays confirmed that LLIN residual activity (median knockdown time, in minutes, or MKDT) decreased significantly over time: 6.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.32–8.58) to 9.24 (95% CI: 8.69–9.79) MKDT at 0- and 12-mo age, respectively, using a pyrethroid-susceptible Aedes strain. Tunnel tests (exposing human forearm for 40 min as attractant) showed that deployment time affected negatively Aedes passage inhibition from 54.9% (95% CI: 43.5–66.2) at 0 mo to 35.7% (95% CI: 16.3–55.1) at 12 mo and blood-feeding inhibition from 65.2% (95% CI: 54.2–76.2) to 48.9% (95% CI: 26.4–71.3), respectively; both the passage/blood-feeding inhibition increased by a factor of 1.8–2.9 on LLINs with multiple and central damages compared with nets with lateral damage. Mosquito mortality was 74.6% (95% CI: 65.3–83.9) at 0 mo, 72.3% (95% CI: 64.1–80.5) at 6 mo, and 59% (95% CI: 46.7–71.3) at 12 mo. Despite the LLIN physical integrity could be compromised over time, we demonstrate that the remaining chemical effect after field conditions would still contribute to killing/repelling mosquitoes.

Tan spot caused by Pyrenophora tritici-repentis ( Ptr ) is an important disease of wheat in many wheat producing areas of the world. A genome wide association study (GWAS) was conducted using 11,401 SNP markers of the Illumina Infinium 15K Bead Chip with whole genome coverage to identify genomic regions associated with resistance to tan spot in a diverse panel of 184 wheat genotypes originating from South Asia and CIMMYT. The GWAS panel was phenotyped for seedling resistance to tan spot with Ptr race 1 in two greenhouse experiments. Besides CIMMYT germplasm, several lines from South Asia (India, Bangladesh and Nepal) showed good degree of resistance to tan spot. Association mapping was conducted separately for individual experiments and for pooled data using mixed linear model (MLM) and Fixed and random model Circulating Probability Unification (FarmCPU) model; no significant MTAs were recorded through the MLM model, whereas FarmCPU model reported nine significant MTAs located on chromosomes 1B, 2A, 2B, 3B, 4A, 5A, 5B, 6A, and 7D. The long arms of chromosomes 5A and 5B were consistent across both environments, in which the Vrn-A1 locus was found in identified region of chromosome 5A, and MTA at IACX9261 on 5BL appears to represent the resistance gene tsn 1 . MTAs observed on chromosomes 1B, 2A, 2B, 3B, 4A, 6A, and 7D have not been reported previously and are likely novel.

Background Diarrhoeal disease is the third leading cause of death in children under 5 years old with domestic flies acting as important mechanical vectors of diarrhoeal pathogens. To assess the effectiveness of a novel house design, “Star home”, and improved toilets in reducing the abundance of domestic flies, potential carriers of diarrhoeal pathogens, a randomized controlled trial was carried out in rural Tanzania. Methods Domestic fly populations were monitored in 28 randomly selected Star homes and 28 traditional thatched roofs and mud-walled houses over 2 years from January 2022 to December 2023. Flies were sampled in kitchens and toilets using baited-fly traps from 07.00 h to 17.30 h every 7 weeks. To assess the production of flies from toilets, traps were placed over drop holes to collect emerging flies. Duration of external door openings to the kitchens was recorded with data loggers. Findings Of the 1527 flies collected, 76% were Chrysomya putoria , 16% Musca domestica and 8% Sarcophaga spp. In kitchen collections, there were 46% fewer C. putoria flies [adjusted mean rate ratio (RR) = 0.54] and 69% fewer Sarcophaga spp. (RR = 0.31) in Star homes compared to traditional houses. There was no difference in the abundance of M. domestica in the two study groups. In toilets, there was 49% fewer C. putoria (RR = 0.51), but no difference was observed for other domestic fly species. No flies emerged from Star home toilets compared with a mean of 4.2 flies/trap/day in traditional toilets. During the day, the external doors od Star homes were open for an average of 13.0 min/h less than in traditional houses. Conclusions Star homes reduced the abundance of domestic flies, apart from houseflies, in the kitchen and there were fewer C. putoria , a putative vector of diarrhoeal diseases, in Star home toilets compared to traditional houses. Changing the design of buildings can contribute to a decline in domestic flies and may lead to a reduction in diarrhoeal diseases. Graphical Abstract