RESUMO
To better guide dengue prevention and control efforts, the use of routinely collected data to develop risk maps is proposed. For this purpose, dengue experts identified indicators representative of entomological, epidemiological and demographic risks, hereafter called components, by using surveillance data aggregated at the level of Consejos Populares (CPs) in two municipalities of Cuba (Santiago de Cuba and Cienfuegos) in the period of 2010-2015. Two vulnerability models (one with equally weighted components and one with data-derived weights using Principal Component Analysis), and three incidence-based risk models were built to construct risk maps. The correlation between the two vulnerability models was high (tau > 0.89). The single-component and multicomponent incidence-based models were also highly correlated (tau ≥ 0.9). However, the agreement between the vulnerability- and the incidence-based risk maps was below 0.6 in the setting with a prolonged history of dengue transmission. This may suggest that an incidence-based approach does not fully reflect the complexity of vulnerability for future transmission. The small difference between single- and multicomponent incidence maps indicates that in a setting with a narrow availability of data, simpler models can be used. Nevertheless, the generalized linear mixed multicomponent model provides information of covariate-adjusted and spatially smoothed relative risks of disease transmission, which can be important for the prospective evaluation of an intervention strategy. In conclusion, caution is needed when interpreting risk maps, as the results vary depending on the importance given to the components involved in disease transmission. The multicomponent vulnerability mapping needs to be prospectively validated based on an intervention trial targeting high-risk areas.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Aedes control interventions are considered the cornerstone of dengue control programmes, but there is scarce evidence on their effect on disease. We set-up a cluster randomized controlled trial in Santiago de Cuba to evaluate the entomological and epidemiological effectiveness of periodical intra- and peri-domiciliary residual insecticide (deltamethrin) treatment (RIT) and long lasting insecticide treated curtains (ITC). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Sixty three clusters (around 250 households each) were randomly allocated to two intervention (RIT and ITC) and one control arm. Routine Aedes control activities (entomological surveillance, source reduction, selective adulticiding, health education) were applied in the whole study area. The outcome measures were clinical dengue case incidence and immature Aedes infestation. Effectiveness of tools was evaluated using a generalized linear regression model with a negative binomial link function. Despite significant reduction in Aedes indices (Rate Ratio (RR) 0.54 (95%CI 0.32-0.89) in the first month after RIT, the effect faded out over time and dengue incidence was not reduced. Overall, in this setting there was no protective effect of RIT or ITC over routine in the 17months intervention period, with for house index RR of 1.16 (95%CI 0.96-1.40) and 1.25 (95%CI 1.03-1.50) and for dengue incidence RR of 1.43 (95%CI 1.08-1.90) and 0.96 (95%CI 0.72-1.28) respectively. The monthly dengue incidence rate (IR) at cluster level was best explained by epidemic periods (Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) 5.50 (95%CI 4.14-7.31)), the IR in bordering houseblocks (IRR 1.03 (95%CI 1.02-1.04)) and the IR pre-intervention (IRR 1.02 (95%CI 1.00-1.04)). CONCLUSIONS: Adding RIT to an intensive routine Aedes control programme has a transient effect on the already moderate low entomological infestation levels, while ITC did not have any effect. For both interventions, we didn't evidence impact on disease incidence. Further studies are needed to evaluate impact in settings with high Aedes infestation and arbovirus case load.