Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Field evaluation of the residual efficacy of new generation insecticides for potential use in indoor residual spray programmes in South Africa
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Field evaluation of the residual efficacy of new generation insecticides for potential use in indoor residual spray programmes in South Africa
Do you wish to request the book?
Field evaluation of the residual efficacy of new generation insecticides for potential use in indoor residual spray programmes in South Africa
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Field evaluation of the residual efficacy of new generation insecticides for potential use in indoor residual spray programmes in South Africa
2024
Overview
Background
The decreasing residual efficacy of insecticides is an important factor when making decisions on insecticide choice for national malaria control programmes. The major challenge to using chemicals for vector control is the selection for the development of insecticide resistance. Since insecticide resistance has been recorded for most of the existing insecticides used for indoor residual spraying, namely, DDT, pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates, and new chemicals are necessary for the continued success of indoor residual spraying. The aim of this study was to assess the residual efficacy of Actellic 300CS, SumiShield™ 50WG and Fludora®Fusion by spraying on different wall surfaces.
Methods
One hundred and sixty-eight houses with different wall surface types (mud, cement, painted cement, and tin) which represented the rural house wall surface types in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa were used to evaluate the residual efficacy of Actellic 300CS, SumiShield 50WG and Fludora®Fusion with DDT as the positive control. All houses were sprayed by experienced spray operators from the Malaria Control Programme. Efficacy of these insecticides were evaluated by contact bioassays against
Anopheles arabiensis
, a vector species. The residual efficacy of the insecticide formulations was evaluated against a susceptible insectary-reared population of
An. arabiensis
using WHO cone bioassays.
Results
Effectiveness of the three insecticides was observed up to 12 months post-spray. When assessing the achievement of 100% mortality over time, SumiShield performed significantly better than DDT on mud (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.72–3.04) and painted cement wall types (OR 3.52, 95% CI 2.36–5.26). On cement wall types, Actellic was found to be less effective than DDT (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37–0.82) while Fludora®Fusion was less effective on tin wall types (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47–0.95). When compared to the combined efficacy of DDT on mud surfaces, SumiShield applied to each of the mud, cement and painted cement wall types and DDT applied to the cement wall types was found to be significantly more effective. These insecticides usually resulted in 100% mortality for up to 12 months with a delayed mortality period of 96–144 h, depending on the insecticide evaluated and the surface type sprayed.
Conclusion
Field evaluation of these insecticides have shown that Actellic, SumiShield and Fludora®Fusion are suitable replacements for DDT. Each of these insecticides can be used for malaria vector control, requiring just one spray round. These insecticides can be used in rotation or as mosaic spraying.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,BMC
Subject
