The combined impact of LLINs, house screening, and pull-push technology for improved malaria control and livelihoods in rural Ethiopia: study protocol for household randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The combined application of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are commonly used malaria interventions that target indoor Anopheles vectors. Recent studies on the effects of house screening (HS) and LLINs have demonstrated a reduction in indoor vector densities and malaria when the interventions are combined. In addition, complementary interventions are needed to curb co-occurring pest populations which pose menace to agricultural crop productivity and food security. However, interventions that impact malaria mainly centre on public health strategies, overlooking subtle but important component of agricultural measures. Addressing the coexisting risks of malaria and crop pests could contribute to improved livelihood of communities. METHODS: A four-armed household, cluster-randomized, controlled study will be conducted to assess the combined impact of HS, LLINs and push-pull agricultural technology (PPT) against clinical malaria in children in Ethiopia. The unit of randomization will be the household, which includes a house and its occupants. A total of 838 households will be enrolled in this study. In this trial 246 households will receive LLINs and HS, 250 will receive LLINs, HS and PPT, 175 households will receive LLINs and PPT. The remaining 167 houses which receive LLINs only will be used as control. One child aged ≤14 years will be enrolled per household in each treatment and followed for clinical malaria using active case detection to estimate malaria incidence for two malaria transmission seasons. DISCUSSION: Episodes of clinical malaria, density of indoor biting malaria vectors, sporozoite infection rate, improved crop infestation rate, crop yield gain, livestock productivity and cost effectiveness analysis will be the end points of this study. Socio-economic, social demographic, cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted using qualitative and participatory methods to explore the acceptability of HS and PPT. Documenting the combined impact of LLINs, HS and PPT on the prevalence of clinical malaria and crop pest damage will be the first of its kind. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202006878245287. 24/06/2020. https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=11101 .

Observing the distribution of mosquito bites on humans to inform personal protection measures against malaria and dengue vectors.

BACKGROUND: Understanding mosquito biting behaviours is important for designing and evaluating protection methods against nuisance biting and mosquito-borne diseases (e.g. dengue, malaria and zika). We investigated the preferred biting sites by Aedes aegypti and Anopheles arabiensis on adult volunteers in standing or sleeping positions; and estimated the theoretical protection limits affordable from protective clothing or repellent-treated footwear. METHODS: Adult volunteers dressed in shorts and t-shirts were exposed to infection-free laboratory-reared mosquitoes inside screened chambers from 6am to noon (for day-biting Ae. aegypti) or 6pm to midnight (night-biting An. arabiensis). Attempted bites on different body parts were recorded. Comparative observations were made on same volunteers while wearing sandals treated with transfluthrin, a vapour-phase pyrethroid that kills and repels mosquitoes. RESULTS: An. arabiensis bites were mainly on the lower limbs of standing volunteers (95.9% of bites below the knees) but evenly-distributed over all exposed body surfaces when the volunteers were on sleeping positions (only 28.8% bites below knees). Ae. aegypti bites were slightly concentrated on lower limbs of standing volunteers (47.7% below knees), but evenly-distributed on sleeping volunteers (23.3% below knees). Wearing protective clothing that leave only hands and head uncovered (e.g. socks + trousers + long-sleeved shirts) could theoretically prevent 78-83% of bites during sleeping, and at least 90% of bites during non-sleeping hours. If the feet are also exposed, protection declines to as low as 36.3% against Anopheles. The experiments showed that transfluthrin-treated sandals reduced An. arabiensis by 54-86% and Ae. aegypti by 32-39%, but did not change overall distributions of bites. CONCLUSION: Biting by An. arabiensis and Ae. aegypti occur mainly on the lower limbs, though this proclivity is less pronounced in the Aedes species. However, when hosts are on sleeping positions, biting by both species is more evenly-distributed over the exposed body surfaces. High personal protection might be achieved by simply wearing long-sleeved clothing, though protection against Anopheles particularly requires covering of feet and lower legs. The transfluthrin-treated footwear can reduce biting risk, especially by An. arabiensis. These findings could inform the design and use of personal protection tools (both insecticidal and non-insecticidal) against mosquitoes and mosquito-borne diseases.