Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reducing Malaria Transmission through Reactive Indoor Residual Spraying: A Systematic Review.
Gimnig, John E; Steinhardt, Laura C; Awolola, Taiwo Samson; Impoinvil, Daniel; Zohdy, Sarah; Lindblade, Kim A.
Afiliación
  • Gimnig JE; Entomology Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Steinhardt LC; Malaria Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Awolola TS; U.S. President's Malaria Initiative, Entomology Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Impoinvil D; U.S. President's Malaria Initiative, Entomology Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Zohdy S; U.S. President's Malaria Initiative, Entomology Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Lindblade KA; Malaria Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 110(4_Suppl): 94-100, 2024 Apr 02.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38118168
ABSTRACT
In the final stages of malaria elimination, interventions to reduce malaria transmission are often centered around a confirmed case of malaria, as cases tend to cluster together at very low levels of transmission. The WHO commissioned a systematic review of the literature and synthesis of evidence for reactive indoor residual spraying (IRS) to develop official recommendations for countries. Several electronic databases were searched in November 2020. A total of 455 records were identified and screened; 20 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Two cluster-randomized trials met the inclusion criteria for epidemiological outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using standard criteria. Because one study was a superiority trial in which the comparator included reactive case detection or mass drug administration and the other was a noninferiority trial in which the comparator was proactive, focal IRS, results could not be pooled. In the superiority trial, reactive IRS reduced malaria prevalence by 68% (risk ratio [RR] 0.32; 95% CI 0.13-0.80; certainty of evidence HIGH) compared with no reactive IRS. No difference was observed for clinical malaria (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.38-1.11; certainty of evidence MODERATE). In the noninferiority study, the mean difference in incidence between reactive IRS and proactive IRS was 0.10 additional case per 1,000 person-years, which was within the prespecified noninferiority bound (95% CI -0.38 to 0.58; certainty of evidence MODERATE). The evidence indicates that reactive IRS may be a cost-effective tool for the prevention of malaria in elimination settings. As only two cluster-randomized controlled trials from sub-Saharan Africa were found, additional high-quality studies should be encouraged.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Control de Mosquitos / Insecticidas / Malaria Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Límite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Trop Med Hyg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Georgia

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Control de Mosquitos / Insecticidas / Malaria Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Límite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Trop Med Hyg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Georgia