Single blinded semi-field evaluation of MAÏA® topical repellent ointment compared to unformulated 20% DEET against Anopheles gambiae, Anopheles arabiensis and Aedes aegypti in Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: N,N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET) topical mosquito repellents are effective personal protection tools. However, DEET-based repellents tend to have low consumer acceptability because they are cosmetically unappealing. More attractive formulations are needed to encourage regular user compliance. This study evaluated the protective efficacy and protection duration of a new topical repellent ointment containing 15% DEET, MAÏA® compared to 20% DEET in ethanol using malaria and dengue mosquito vectors in Bagamoyo Tanzania. METHODS: Fully balanced 3 × 3 Latin square design studies were conducted in large semi-field chambers using laboratory strains of Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto, Anopheles arabiensis and Aedes aegypti. Human volunteers applied either MAÏA® ointment, 20% DEET or ethanol to their lower limbs 6 h before the start of tests. Approximately 100 mosquitoes per strain per replicate were released inside each chamber, with 25 mosquitoes released at regular intervals during the collection period to maintain adequate biting pressure throughout the test. Volunteers recaptured mosquitoes landing on their lower limbs for 6 h over a period of 6 to 12-h post-application of repellents. Data analysis was conducted using mixed-effects logistic regression. RESULTS: The protective efficacy of MAÏA® and 20% DEET was not statistically different for each of the mosquito strains: 95.9% vs. 97.4% against An. gambiae (OR = 1.53 [95% CI 0.93-2.51] p = 0.091); 96.8% vs 97.2% against An. arabiensis (OR = 1.08 [95% CI 0.66-1.77] p = 0.757); 93.1% vs 94.6% against Ae. aegypti (OR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.20-2.80] p = 0.675). Average complete protection time (CPT) in minutes of MAÏA® and that of DEET was similar for each of the mosquito strains: 571.6 min (95% CI 558.3-584.8) vs 575.0 min (95% CI 562.1-587.9) against An. gambiae; 585.6 min (95% CI 571.4-599.8) vs 580.9 min (95% CI 571.1-590.7) against An. arabiensis; 444.1 min (95% CI 401.8-486.5) vs 436.9 min (95% CI 405.2-468.5) against Ae. aegypti. CONCLUSIONS: MAÏA® repellent ointment provides complete protection for 9 h against both An. gambiae and An. arabiensis, and 7 h against Ae. aegypti similar to 20% DEET (in ethanol). MAÏA® repellent ointment can be recommended as a tool for prevention against outdoor biting mosquitoes in tropical locations where the majority of the people spend an ample time outdoor before going to bed.

Insecticide-treated eave nets and window screens for malaria control in Chalinze district, Tanzania: a study protocol for a household randomised control trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) have contributed to the reduction of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa, including Tanzania. However, they rely on daily user behaviour and high coverage which is difficult to maintain. Also, insecticide resistance among malaria vector mosquitoes is contributing to reduced efficacy of control tools. To overcome these problems, we propose to evaluate a new tool for house modification, the insecticide-treated eave nets (ITENs) in combination with insecticide-treated window screens (ITWS) incorporated with dual active ingredient (dual AI) for the control of malaria. METHODS: Four hundred and fifty (450) households with intact walls, open eaves without screens or nets on the windows in Chalinze district will be eligible and recruited upon written informed consent. The households will be randomly allocated into two arms: one with ITENs and ITWS installed and the other without. Malaria parasite detection using a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) will be conducted shortly after the long rain (June/July, 2022) as the primary outcome and shortly after the short rain (January/February, 2022) as the secondary outcome. Other secondary outcomes include clinical malaria cases, and density of malaria vectors and nuisance after the short rain and long rain. In addition, surveys will be conducted in households with ITENs and ITWS to estimate the intervention's cost during installation, adverse effects one month after installation, and presence, fabric integrity and user acceptance six and twelve months after installation. Bioefficacy and chemical content will be evaluated twelve months after installation. DISCUSSION: ITENs and ITWS have been shown in Kenya to reduce indoor mosquito density. However, it is not known if indoor mosquito density reduction translates into reduction of malaria cases. Data from the study will measure the potential public health value of an additional intervention for malaria control at the household level in areas of mosquito insecticide resistance that does not require daily adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov .