Search

Vector-borne diseases, including dengue, leishmaniasis and malaria, may be more common among individuals whose occupations or behaviours bring them into frequent contact with these disease vectors outside of their homes. A systematic review was conducted to ascertain at-risk occupations and situations that put individuals at increased risk of exposure to these disease vectors in endemic regions and identify the most suitable interventions for each exposure. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines on articles published between 1945 and October 2021, searched in 16 online databases. The primary outcome was incidence or prevalence of dengue, leishmaniasis or malaria. The review excluded ecological and qualitative studies, abstracts only, letters, commentaries, reviews, and studies of laboratory-acquired infections. Studies were appraised, data extracted, and a descriptive analysis conducted. Bite interventions for each risk group were assessed. A total of 1170 articles were screened and 99 included. Malaria, leishmaniasis and dengue were presented in 47, 41 and 24 articles, respectively; some articles presented multiple conditions. The most represented populations were soldiers, 38% (43 of 112 studies); refugees and travellers, 15% (17) each; migrant workers, 12.5% (14); miners, 9% (10); farmers, 5% (6); rubber tappers and missionaries, 1.8% (2) each; and forest workers, 0.9% (1). Risk of exposure was categorised into round-the-clock or specific times of day/night dependent on occupation. Exposure to these vectors presents a critical and understudied concern for outdoor workers and mobile populations. When devising interventions to provide round-the-clock vector bite protection, two populations are considered. First, mobile populations, characterized by their high mobility, may find potential benefits in insecticide-treated clothing, though more research and optimization are essential. Treated clothing offers personal vector protection and holds promise for economically disadvantaged individuals, especially when enabling them to self-treat their clothing to repel vectors. Secondly, semi-permanent and permanent settlement populations can receive a combination of interventions that offer both personal and community protection, including spatial repellents, suitable for extended stays. Existing research is heavily biased towards tourism and the military, diverting attention and resources from vulnerable populations where these interventions are most required like refugee populations as well as those residing in sub-Saharan Africa.

Abstract Background Progress against malaria has stalled and may even be slipping backwards in high-burden countries. This is due to a range of factors including insecticide resistance and mosquito feeding behaviours that limit contact with widely-employed interventions including long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor-residual spraying. Thus, further innovations in malaria control are urgently needed. Methods The pilot was a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of permethrin-treated baby wraps—known locally as lesus—in children 6–18 months of age at a single site in rural western Uganda. Fifty mother–infant pairs were assigned to permethrin-treated or untreated lesus in a 1:1 allocation. Participants and clinical staff were blinded to group assignments through use of sham treatment and re-treatment of lesus. Participants attended scheduled clinic visits every 2 weeks for a total 12 weeks. The primary outcome of interest was the safety of the intervention, assessed as changes in the frequency of use, rates of discontinuation, and incidence of adverse events, such as skin rash. Secondary outcomes included acceptability and feasibility of the intervention as measured through participant satisfaction and completion of study activities, respectively. Results Overall, rates of retention and participation were relatively high with 86.0% (43 of 50) of participants completing all scheduled visits, including 18 (75.0%) and 25 (96.2%) in the intervention and control arms respectively. By the conclusion of the 12-week follow-up period, one adverse event (0.35 events per 100 person-weeks, one-sided 95% CI 0.0–1.65) was reported. Satisfaction with the lesu was high in both groups. In each study arm, there were five incident RDT positive results, but the only PCR-positive results were observed in the control group (n = 2). Conclusions Permethrin-treated baby wraps were well-tolerated and broadly acceptable. Adverse events were infrequent and mild. These findings support future trials seeking to determine the efficacy of treated wraps to prevent P. falciparum malaria infection in young children as a complementary tool to existing household-based interventions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04102592, Registered 25 September 2019. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04102592

Abstract Background While there is strong evidence that bite protection methods such as permethrin-treated clothing and topical insect repellents are protective against insect bites, there are few studies assessing the impact on malaria infection. This study will estimate the protective efficacy of treated uniforms and DEET insect repellent on the incidence of malaria infection among military personnel in an operational setting. Permethrin-treated uniforms used with DEET lotion will be compared to etofenprox-treated uniforms with DEET lotion. The effect of DEET lotion will be estimated by comparing permethrin-treated uniforms with DEET or placebo lotion. Method A cluster randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial is planned to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions on preventing malaria infections in soldiers on active duty at Mgambo National Service Camp in Tanga, Tanzania. The arms are (1) permethrin-treated uniform with 30% DEET liposome formula; (2) permethrin-treated uniform with placebo lotion; (3) candidate insect repellent system, i.e. etofenprox-treated uniform with 30% DEET liposome formula; and (4) placebo, i.e. untreated uniforms with placebo lotion. The primary outcome is the incidence of Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) by active case detection using surveys every 2 weeks for 12 months. Rapid diagnostic tests will be used for the diagnosis of participants with symptoms. The unit of randomisation will be combania: companies formed by recruits aged 18 to 25 years; combania do activities together and sleep in the same dormitory. Unequal randomisation will be used to optimise statistical power for the primary comparison between permethrin-treated uniforms with DEET and etofenprox-treated uniforms with DEET. Discussion This trial will provide the estimate of the effects of permethrin with DEET compared to those of the new fabric treatment etofenprox with DEET and any additional effect of using DEET. The results will inform strategies to protect military personnel and civilians who have more outdoor or occupational malaria exposure than the general public. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02938975 .

Summary: Background: The eye-seeking fly Musca sorbens can act as a vector for ocular Chlamydia trachomatis, causing trachoma, yet there has been very little research on control measures. We investigated whether insect repellent products, specifically insecticide-treated clothing, could provide personal protection to the user from eye-seeking flies. Methods: We first conducted a series of phase I laboratory studies to inform our choice of field intervention. We then conducted a phase II randomised controlled trial testing the efficacy of permethrin-treated scarves (PTS) in reducing fly-face contact in Oromia, Ethiopia. Children aged 4-10 years in full health and with no known adverse reactions to permethrin or other insecticides were allocated to either arm using restricted randomisation. Intervention arm children wore Insect Shield® versatile wraps (as PTS) for 28 days. The primary outcomes, fly-eye, -nose and -mouth contact, were assessed on the first day (0/30/60/180 minutes), on day 7 and on day 28. All participants present per timepoint were included in analyses. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03813069). Findings: Participants were recruited to the field trial between 29/10/2019 and 01/11/2019, 58 were randomised to test or control arm. More fly (-eye, -nose and -mouth) contacts were observed in the PTS arm at baseline. After adjusting for baseline contact rates, across all timepoints there was a 35% decrease in fly-eye contacts in the PTS relative to control arm (rate ratio [RR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.52-0.83). Similar cross-timepoint reductions were seen for fly-nose and fly-mouth contacts (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.92 and RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62-1.01, respectively). All children were included on day 0. Two in the control arm were absent on day 7, one left the study and four were excluded from analysis at day 28. No adverse events occurred in the trial. Interpretation: Musca sorbens flies are sufficiently repelled by PTS to reduce fly-eye contacts for the wearer, thus possibly reducing the risk of trachoma transmission. Permethrin-treated scarves may therefore an alternative to insecticide space spraying for protection from these flies. Funding: Wellcome Trust.

Background: Progress against malaria has stalled and may even be slipping backwards in high-burden countries. This is due to a range of factors including insecticide resistance and mosquito feeding behaviours that limit contact with widely-employed interventions including long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor-residual spraying. Thus, further innovations in malaria control are urgently needed. Methods: The pilot was a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of permethrin-treated baby wraps—known locally as lesus—in children 6–18 months of age at a single site in rural western Uganda. Fifty mother–infant pairs were assigned to permethrin-treated or untreated lesus in a 1:1 allocation. Participants and clinical staff were blinded to group assignments through use of sham treatment and re-treatment of lesus. Participants attended scheduled clinic visits every 2 weeks for a total 12 weeks. The primary outcome of interest was the safety of the intervention, assessed as changes in the frequency of use, rates of discontinuation, and incidence of adverse events, such as skin rash. Secondary outcomes included acceptability and feasibility of the intervention as measured through participant satisfaction and completion of study activities, respectively. Results: Overall, rates of retention and participation were relatively high with 86.0% (43 of 50) of participants completing all scheduled visits, including 18 (75.0%) and 25 (96.2%) in the intervention and control arms respectively. By the conclusion of the 12-week follow-up period, one adverse event (0.35 events per 100 person-weeks, one-sided 95% CI 0.0–1.65) was reported. Satisfaction with the lesu was high in both groups. In each study arm, there were five incident RDT positive results, but the only PCR-positive results were observed in the control group (n = 2). Conclusions: Permethrin-treated baby wraps were well-tolerated and broadly acceptable. Adverse events were infrequent and mild. These findings support future trials seeking to determine the efficacy of treated wraps to prevent P. falciparum malaria infection in young children as a complementary tool to existing household-based interventions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04102592, Registered 25 September 2019. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04102592 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While there is strong evidence that bite protection methods such as permethrin-treated clothing and topical insect repellents are protective against insect bites, there are few studies assessing the impact on malaria infection. This study will estimate the protective efficacy of treated uniforms and DEET insect repellent on the incidence of malaria infection among military personnel in an operational setting. Permethrin-treated uniforms used with DEET lotion will be compared to etofenprox-treated uniforms with DEET lotion. The effect of DEET lotion will be estimated by comparing permethrin-treated uniforms with DEET or placebo lotion.Method: A cluster randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial is planned to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions on preventing malaria infections in soldiers on active duty at Mgambo National Service Camp in Tanga, Tanzania. The arms are (1) permethrin-treated uniform with 30% DEET liposome formula; (2) permethrin-treated uniform with placebo lotion; (3) candidate insect repellent system, i.e. etofenprox-treated uniform with 30% DEET liposome formula; and (4) placebo, i.e. untreated uniforms with placebo lotion. The primary outcome is the incidence of Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) by active case detection using surveys every 2 weeks for 12 months. Rapid diagnostic tests will be used for the diagnosis of participants with symptoms. The unit of randomisation will be combania: companies formed by recruits aged 18 to 25 years; combania do activities together and sleep in the same dormitory. Unequal randomisation will be used to optimise statistical power for the primary comparison between permethrin-treated uniforms with DEET and etofenprox-treated uniforms with DEET.Discussion: This trial will provide the estimate of the effects of permethrin with DEET compared to those of the new fabric treatment etofenprox with DEET and any additional effect of using DEET. The results will inform strategies to protect military personnel and civilians who have more outdoor or occupational malaria exposure than the general public.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02938975 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insecticide-treated clothing (ITC) has long been used for military and outdoor recreational purposes and there is substantial evidence to show that it can protect against arthropod biting. As a complementary vector control measure, ITC could be used to address outdoor transmission of malaria, particularly among mobile and migrant populations and night-time workers such as rubber tappers, who may be beyond the reach of core interventions. However, more information is required on acceptability and preferences of target groups towards ITC to understand whether it could be a viable strategy in Myanmar. Methods: A cluster-randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority crossover trial was performed to determine acceptability of ITC versus identical, untreated clothing (NTC) among migrant rubber tappers. The study took place between January and May 2015 with 234 participants in 16 clusters in Thanbyuzayat Township, Mon State, Myanmar. Participants were randomly assigned to the order of clothing distribution and followed up at 2, 4 and 6 week intervals. Acceptability was assessed through structured questionnaires, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. A cluster-level non-inferiority analysis was conducted using STATA, while qualitative data were digitally recorded, transcribed and content-analysed to identify patterns and themes, and managed thematically in Excel 2010®. Results: Acceptability of both types of clothing was high. ITC was deduced to be non-inferior to NTC for seven out of eight indicators regarding perceptions (looks nice, is durable, is pleasant to wear for nighttime work, reduces mosquito bites, would recommend the clothing, would buy the clothing, like the clothing overall). A high proportion of respondents reported that the clothing reduced mosquito bites (ITC-98%; NTC-94%). Clothing was worn regularly (about 11 times in the previous two weeks). The most common reasons for not wearing the clothing every night were that it was being washed or dried, or the participant did not go to work. Conclusions: The high level of acceptability suggests that ITC could be an appropriate strategy for personal protection amongst migrant rubber tappers in outdoor transmission settings in Myanmar. However, more research is needed into the feasibility and protective efficacy of ITC before it can be considered for wider roll-out. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]