The needs and opportunities for housing improvement for malaria control in southern Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Malaria disproportionately affects low-income households in rural communities where poor housing is common. Despite evidence that well-constructed and mosquito-proofed houses can reduce malaria risk, housing improvement is rarely included in malaria control toolboxes. This study assessed the need, magnitude, and opportunities for housing improvement to control malaria in rural Tanzania. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted in 19 villages across four district councils in southern Tanzania. A structured survey was administered to 1292 community members to assess need, perceptions, and opportunities for housing improvement for malaria control. Direct observations of 802 houses and surrounding environments were done to identify the actual needs and opportunities, and to validate the survey findings. A market survey was done to assess availability and cost of resources and services necessary for mosquito-proofing homes. Focus group discussions were conducted with key stakeholders to explore insights on the potential and challenges of housing improvement as a malaria intervention. RESULTS: Compared to other methods for malaria control, housing improvement was among the best understood and most preferred by community members. Of the 735 survey respondents who needed housing improvements, a majority needed window screening (91.1%), repairs of holes in walls (79.4%), door covers (41.6%), closing of eave spaces (31.2%) and better roofs (19.0%). Community members invested significant efforts to improve their own homes against malaria and other dangers, but these efforts were often slow and delayed due to high costs and limited household incomes. Study participants suggested several mechanisms of support to improve their homes, including government loans and subsidies. CONCLUSION: Addressing the need for housing improvement is a critical component of malaria control efforts in southern Tanzania. In this study, a majority of the community members surveyed needed modest modifications and had plans to work on those modifications. Without additional support, their efforts were however generally slow; households would take years to sufficiently mosquito-proof their houses. It is, therefore, crucial to bring together the key players across sectors to reduce barriers in malaria-proofing housing in endemic settings. These may include government subsidies or partnerships with businesses to make housing improvement more accessible and affordable to residents.

Improving houses in the Bolivian Chaco increases effectiveness of residual insecticide spraying against infestation with Triatoma infestans, vector of Chagas disease.

OBJECTIVE: Failure to control domestic Triatoma infestans in the Chaco is attributed to vulnerable adobe construction, which provides vector refuges and diminishes insecticide contact. We conducted a pilot to test the impact of housing improvement plus indoor residual spraying (IRS) on house infestation and vector abundance in a rural community in the Bolivian Chaco. METHODS: The intervention included three arms: housing improvement + IRS [HI], assisted IRS [AS] in which the team helped to clear the house pre-IRS and routine IRS [RS]. HI used locally available materials, traditional construction techniques and community participation. Vector parameters were assessed by Timed Manual Capture for 2 person-hours per house at baseline and medians of 114, 173, 314, 389 and 445 days post-IRS-1. A second IRS round was applied at a median of 314 days post-IRS-1. RESULTS: Post-intervention infestation indices and abundance fell in all three arms. The mean odds of infestation was 0.29 (95% CL 0.124, 0.684) in the HI relative to the RS arm. No difference was observed between AS and RS. Vector abundance was reduced by a mean 44% (24.8, 58.0) in HI compared to RS, with no difference between AS and RS. Median delivered insecticide concentrations per house were lower than the target of 50 mg/m2 in >90% of houses in all arms. CONCLUSION: Housing improvement using local materials and community participation is a promising strategy to improve IRS effectiveness in the Bolivian Chaco. A larger trial is needed to quantify the impact on reinfestation over time.

The Regeneración Urbana, Calidad de Vida y Salud - RUCAS project: a Chilean multi-methods study to evaluate the impact of urban regeneration on resident health and wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: The available evidence of the health effects of urban regeneration is scarce In Latin America, and there are no studies focused on formal housing that longitudinally evaluate the impact of housing and neighborhood interventions on health. The "Regeneración Urbana, Calidad de Vida y Salud" (Urban Regeneration, Quality of Life, and Health) or RUCAS project is a longitudinal, multi-method study that will evaluate the impact of an intervention focused on dwellings, built environment and community on the health and wellbeing of the population in two social housing neighborhoods in Chile. METHODS: RUCAS consists of a longitudinal study where inhabitants exposed and unexposed to the intervention will be compared over time within the study neighborhoods (cohorts), capitalizing on interventions as a natural experiment. Researchers have developed a specific conceptual framework and identified potential causal mechanisms. Proximal and more distal intervention effects will be measured with five instruments, implemented pre- and post-interventions between 2018 and 2021: a household survey, an observation tool to evaluate dwelling conditions, hygrochrons for measuring temperature and humidity inside dwellings, systematic observation of recreational areas, and qualitative interviews. Survey baseline data (956 households, 3130 individuals) is presented to describe sociodemographics, housing and health characteristics of both cohorts, noting that neighborhoods studied show worse conditions than the Chilean population. DISCUSSION: RUCAS' design allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the effects that the intervention could have on various dimensions of health and health determinants. RUCAS will face some challenges, like changes in the intervention process due to adjustments of the master plan, exogenous factors -including COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns- and lost to follow-up. Given the stepped wedge design, that the study capitalizes on within household changes over time, the possibility of adjusting data collection process and complementarity of methods, RUCAS has the flexibility to adapt to these circumstances. Also, RUCAS' outreach and retention strategy has led to high retention rates. RUCAS will provide evidence to inform regeneration processes, highlighting the need to consider potential health effects of regeneration in designing such interventions and, more broadly, health as a key priority in urban and housing policies.

The effect of improved housing on indoor mosquito density and exposure to malaria in the rural community of Minkoameyos, Centre Region of Cameroon.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effectiveness of improved housing on indoor residual mosquito density and exposure to infected Anophelines in Minkoameyos, a rural community in southern forested Cameroon. METHODS: Following the identification of housing factors affecting malaria prevalence in 2013, 218 houses were improved by screening the doors and windows, installing plywood ceilings on open eaves and closing holes on walls and doors. Monthly entomological surveys were conducted in a sample of 21 improved and 21 non-improved houses from November 2014 to October 2015. Mosquitoes sampled from night collections on human volunteers were identified morphologically and their parity status determined. Mosquito infectivity was verified through Plasmodium falciparum CSP ELISA and the average entomological inoculation rates determined. A Reduction Factor (RF), defined as the ratio of the values for mosquitoes collected outdoor to those collected indoor was calculated in improved houses (RFI) and non-improved houses (RFN). An Intervention Effect (IE = RFI/RFN) measured the true effect of the intervention. Chi square test was used to determine variable significance. The threshold for statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1113 mosquitoes were collected comprising Anopheles sp (58.6%), Culex sp (36.4%), Aedes sp (2.5%), Mansonia sp (2.4%) and Coquillettidia sp (0.2%). Amongst the Anophelines were Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) (95.2%), Anopheles funestus (2.9%), Anopheles ziemanni (0.2%), Anopheles brohieri (1.2%) and Anopheles paludis (0.5%). Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (s.s.) was the only An. gambiae sibling species found. The intervention reduced the indoor Anopheles density by 1.8-fold (RFI = 3.99; RFN = 2.21; P = 0.001). The indoor density of parous Anopheles was reduced by 1.7-fold (RFI = 3.99; RFN = 2.21; P = 0.04) and that of infected Anopheles by 1.8-fold (RFI = 3.26; RFN = 1.78; P = 0.04). Indoor peak biting rates were observed between 02 a.m. to 04 a.m. in non-improved houses and from 02 a.m. to 06 a.m. in improved houses. CONCLUSION: Housing improvement contributed to reducing indoor residual anopheline density and malaria transmission. This highlights the need for policy specialists to further evaluate and promote aspects of house design as a complementary control tool that could reduce indoor human-vector contact and malaria transmission in similar epidemiological settings.

Semi-field evaluation of the cumulative effects of a "Lethal House Lure" on malaria mosquito mortality.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the potential to modify houses to target mosquitoes with insecticides or repellents as they search for human hosts. One version of this 'Lethal House Lure' approach is the In2Care® EaveTube, which consists of a section of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe fitted into a closed eave, with an insert comprising electrostatic netting treated with insecticide powder placed inside the tube. Preliminary evidence suggests that when combined with screening of doors and windows, there is a reduction in entry of mosquitoes and an increase in mortality. However, the rate of overnight mortality remains unclear. The current study used a field enclosure built around experimental huts to investigate the mortality of cohorts of mosquitoes over multiple nights. METHODS: Anopheles gambiae sensu lato mosquitoes were collected from the field as larvae and reared through to adult. Three-to-five days old adult females were released inside an enclosure housing two modified West African style experimental huts at a field site in M'be, Côte d'Ivoire. Huts were either equipped with insecticide-treated tubes at eave height and had closed windows (treatment) or had open windows and open tubes (controls). The number of host-seeking mosquitoes entering the huts and cumulative mortality were monitored over 2 or 4 days. RESULTS: Very few (0-0.4%) mosquitoes were able to enter huts fitted with insecticide-treated tubes and closed windows. In contrast, mosquitoes continually entered the control huts, with a cumulative mean of 50-80% over 2 to 4 days. Baseline mortality with control huts was approximately 2-4% per day, but the addition of insecticide-treated tubes increased mortality to around 25% per day. Overall cumulative mortality was estimated to be up to 87% over 4 days when huts were fitted with tubes. CONCLUSION: Only 20-25% of mosquitoes contacted insecticide-treated tubes or entered control huts in a given night. However, mosquitoes continue to host search over sequential nights, and this can lead to high cumulative mortality over 2 to 4 days. This mortality should contribute to community-level reduction in transmission assuming sufficient coverage of the intervention.

Semi-field studies to better understand the impact of eave tubes on mosquito mortality and behaviour.

BACKGROUND: Eave tubes are a type of housing modification that provide a novel way of delivering insecticides to mosquitoes as they attempt to enter the house. The current study reports on a series of semi-field studies aimed at improving the understanding of how eave tubes might impact mosquito mortality and behaviour. METHODS: Experiments were conducted using West African style experimental huts at a field site in M'be, Côte d'Ivoire. Huts were modified in various ways to determine: (i) whether mosquitoes in this field setting naturally recruit to eave tubes; (ii) whether eave tubes can reduce house entry even in the absence of screening; (iii) whether mosquitoes suffer mortality if they attempt to exit a house via treated eave tubes; and, (iv) whether screening and eave tubes might deflect mosquitoes into neighbouring houses without the intervention. RESULTS: Ninety percent more mosquitoes (Anopheles gambiae sensu lato, and other species) entered huts through open eaves tubes compared to window slits. The addition of insecticide-treated eave tubes reduced mosquito entry by 60%, even when windows remained open. Those mosquitoes that managed to enter the huts exhibited a 64% reduction in blood feeding and a tendency for increased mortality, suggesting contact with insecticide-treated inserts prior to hut entry. When An. gambiae mosquitoes were deliberately introduced into huts with treated eave tubes, there was evidence of six times increase in overnight mortality, suggesting mosquitoes can contact treated eave tube inserts when trying to exit the hut. There was no evidence for deflection of mosquitoes from huts with screening, or screening plus eave tubes, to adjacent unmodified huts. CONCLUSIONS: Eave tubes are a potentially effective way to target Anopheles mosquitoes with insecticides. That treated eave tubes can reduce mosquito entry even when windows are open is a potentially important result as it suggests that eave tubes might not need to be combined with household screening to have an impact on malaria transmission. The absence of deflection is also a potentially important result as coverage of eave tubes and/or screening is unlikely to be 100% and it is important that households that do not have the technology are not disadvantaged by those that do.

The role of human and mosquito behaviour in the efficacy of a house-based intervention.

Housing improvement such as blocking eaves and screening windows can help in reducing exposure to indoor biting mosquitoes. The impacts of physical barriers could potentially be boosted by the addition of a mechanism that kills mosquitoes as they attempt to enter the house. One example is to combine household screening with EaveTubes, which are insecticide-treated tubes inserted into closed eaves that attract and kill host-searching mosquitoes. The epidemiological impact of screening + EaveTubes is being evaluated in a large cluster randomized trial in Cote d'Ivoire. The study presented here is designed as a complement to this trial to help better understand the functional roles of screening and EaveTubes. We began by evaluating householder behaviour and household condition in the study villages. This work revealed that doors (and to some extent windows) were left open for large parts of the evening and morning, and that even houses modified to make them more 'mosquito proof' often had possible entry points for mosquitoes. We next built two realistic experimental houses in a village to enable us to explore how these aspects of behaviour and household quality affected the impact of screening and EaveTubes. We found that screening could have a substantial impact on indoor mosquito densities, even with realistic household condition and behaviour. By contrast, EaveTubes had no significant impact on indoor mosquito density, either as a stand-alone intervention or in combination with screening. However, there was evidence that mosquitoes recruited to the EaveTubes, and the resulting mortality could create a community benefit. These complementary modes of action of screening and EaveTubes support the rationale of combining the technologies to create a 'Lethal House Lure'. This article is part of the theme issue 'Novel control strategies for mosquito-borne diseases'.