Community perceptions, acceptability, and the durability of house screening interventions against exposure to malaria vectors in Nyimba district, Zambia.

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.

The economic impacts of house screening against malaria transmission: Experimental evidence from eastern Zambia.

Malaria imposes an economic burden for human populations in many African countries, and this burden may be reduced through house screening initiatives. We use a randomized controlled trial to measure the economic impacts of house screening against malaria infection. We use a sample of 800 households from 89 villages in rural and peri-urban Zambia to collect baseline data in August 2019 and endline data in August 2020. The main outcome variables are (self-reported) malaria prevalence rates, labor supply, and income, and consider individual and household-level outcomes. House screening reduces malaria prevalence, the number of sick days due to malaria, and the number of malaria episodes. Impacts on adults are more pronounced than on children. In terms of economic impacts, house screening increases labor supply and (household) income. We find particularly large effects on labor supply for women household members. A cost-benefit analysis, based on estimated benefits and measured costs, suggests that the private benefits of house screening exceed the costs. While not all houses are suitable for house screening, we conclude that screening is a promising and cost-effective approach to reduce malaria infections.

Evaluating the efficacy, impact, and feasibility of community-based house screening as a complementary malaria control intervention in southern Africa: a study protocol for a household randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Concerted effort to control malaria has had a substantial impact on the transmission of the disease in the past two decades. In areas where reduced malaria transmission is being sustained through insecticide-based vector control interventions, primarily long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), non-insecticidal complementary tools will likely be needed to push towards malaria elimination. Once interruption in local disease transmission is achieved, insecticide-based measures can be scaled down gradually and eventually phased out, saving on costs of sustaining control programs and mitigating any unintended negative health and environmental impacts posed by insecticides. These non-insecticidal methods could eventually replace insecticidal methods of vector control. House screening, a non-insecticidal method, has a long history in malaria control, but is still not widely adopted in sub-Saharan Africa. This study aims to add to the evidence base for this intervention in low transmission settings by assessing the efficacy, impact, and feasibility of house screening in areas where LLINs are conventionally used for malaria control. METHODS: A two-armed, household randomized clinical trial will be conducted in Mozambique, Zambia, and Zimbabwe to evaluate whether combined the use of house screens and LLINs affords better protection against clinical malaria in children between 6 months and 13 years compared to the sole use of LLINs. Eight hundred households will be enrolled in each study area, where 400 households will be randomly assigned the intervention, house screening, and LLINs while the control households will be provided with LLINs only. Clinical malaria incidence will be estimated by actively following up one child from each household for 6 months over the malaria transmission season. Cross-sectional parasite prevalence will be estimated by testing all participating children for malaria parasites at the beginning and end of each transmission season using rapid diagnostic tests. CDC light traps and pyrethrum spray catches (PSC) will be used to sample adult mosquitoes and evaluate the impact of house screening on indoor mosquito density, species distribution, and sporozoite rates. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute epidemiological data on the impact of house screening on malaria transmission and assess the feasibility of its implementation on a programmatic scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov PACTR202008524310568 . Registered on August 11, 2020.