Search

Abstract Africa and the United States are both large, heterogeneous geographies with a diverse range of ecologies, climates and mosquito species diversity which contribute to disease transmission and nuisance biting. In the United States, mosquito control is nationally, and regionally coordinated and in so much as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) provides guidance, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides pesticide registration, and the states provide legal authority and oversight, the implementation is usually decentralized to the state, county, or city level. Mosquito control operations are organized, in most instances, into fully independent mosquito abatement districts, public works departments, local health departments. In some cases, municipalities engage independent private contractors to undertake mosquito control within their jurisdictions. In sub–Saharan Africa (SSA), where most vector-borne disease endemic countries lie, mosquito control is organized centrally at the national level. In this model, the disease control programmes (national malaria control programmes or national malaria elimination programmes (NMCP/NMEP)) are embedded within the central governments’ ministries of health (MoHs) and drive vector control policy development and implementation. Because of the high disease burden and limited resources, the primary endpoint of mosquito control in these settings is reduction of mosquito borne diseases, primarily, malaria. In the United States, however, the endpoint is mosquito control, therefore, significant (or even greater) emphasis is laid on nuisance mosquitoes as much as disease vectors. The authors detail experiences and learnings gathered by the delegation of African vector control professionals that participated in a formal exchange programme initiated by the Pan-African Mosquito Control Association (PAMCA), the University of Notre Dame, and members of the American Mosquito Control Association (AMCA), in the United States between the year 2021 and 2022. The authors highlight the key components of mosquito control operations in the United States and compare them to mosquito control programmes in SSA countries endemic for vector-borne diseases, deriving important lessons that could be useful for vector control in SSA.

Abstract Background In 2015, Tanzania National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) established a longitudinal malaria vector entomological surveillance (MVES). The MVES is aimed at a periodical assessment of malaria vector composition and abundance, feeding and resting behaviours, and Plasmodium falciparum infection in different malaria epidemiological strata to guide the NMCP on the deployment of appropriate malaria vector interventions. This work details the dynamics of malaria vector composition and transmission in different malaria epidemiological strata. Methods The MVES was conducted from 32 sentinel district councils across the country. Mosquitoes were collected by the trained community members and supervised by the NMCP and research institutions. Three consecutive night catches (indoor collection with CDC light trap and indoor/outdoor collection using bucket traps) were conducted monthly in three different households selected randomly from two to three wards within each district council. Collected mosquitoes were sorted and morphologically identified in the field. Thereafter, the samples were sent to the laboratory for molecular characterization using qPCR for species identification and detection of P. falciparum infections (sporozoites). ELISA technique was deployed for blood meal analysis from samples of blood-fed mosquitoes to determine the blood meal indices (BMI). Results A total of 63,226 mosquitoes were collected in 32 district councils from January 2017 to December 2021. Out of which, 39,279 (62%), 20,983 (33%) and 2964 (5%) were morphologically identified as Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.), Anopheles funestus s.l., and as other Anopheles species, respectively. Out of 28,795 laboratory amplified mosquitoes, 13,645 (47%) were confirmed to be Anopheles arabiensis, 9904 (34%) as An. funestus sensu stricto (s.s.), and 5193 (19%) as An. gambiae s.s. The combined average entomological inoculation rates (EIR) were 0.46 (95% CI 0.028–0.928) for An. gambiae s.s., 0.836 (95% CI 0.138–1.559) for An. arabiensis, and 0.58 (95% CI 0.165–0.971) for An. funestus s.s. with variations across different malaria transmission strata. Anopheles funestus s.s. and An. arabiensis were predominant in the Lake and South-Eastern zones, respectively, mostly in high malaria transmission areas. Monthly mosquito densities displayed seasonal patterns, with two peaks following the rainy seasons, varying slightly across species and district councils. Conclusion Anopheles arabiensis remains the predominant vector species followed by An. funestus s.s. in the country. Therefore, strengthening integrated vector management including larval source management is recommended to address outdoor transmission by An. arabiensis to interrupt transmission particularly where EIR is greater than the required elimination threshold of less than one (

Abstract Background Different forms of mosquito modifications are being considered as potential high-impact and low-cost tools for future malaria control in Africa. Although still under evaluation, the eventual success of these technologies will require high-level public acceptance. Understanding prevailing community perceptions of mosquito modification is, therefore, crucial for effective design and implementation of these interventions. This study investigated community perceptions regarding genetically-modified mosquitoes (GMMs) and their potential for malaria control in Tanzanian villages where no research or campaign for such technologies has yet been undertaken. Methods A mixed-methods design was used, involving: (i) focus group discussions (FGD) with community leaders to get insights on how they frame and would respond to GMMs, and (ii) structured questionnaires administered to 490 community members to assess awareness, perceptions and support for GMMs for malaria control. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the findings and thematic content analysis was used to identify key concepts and interpret the findings. Results Nearly all survey respondents were unaware of mosquito modification technologies for malaria control (94.3%), and reported no knowledge of their specific characteristics (97.3%). However, community leaders participating in FGDs offered a set of distinctive interpretive frames to conceptualize interventions relying on GMMs for malaria control. The participants commonly referenced their experiences of cross-breeding for selecting preferred traits in domestic plants and animals. Preferred GMMs attributes included the expected reductions in insecticide use and human labour. Population suppression approaches, requiring as few releases as possible, were favoured. Common concerns included whether the GMMs would look or behave differently than wild mosquitoes, and how the technology would be integrated into current malaria control policies. The participants emphasised the importance and the challenge of educating and engaging communities during the technology development. Conclusions Understanding how communities perceive and interpret novel technologies is crucial to the design and effective implementation of new vector control programmes. This study offers vital clues on how communities with no prior experience of modified mosquitoes might conceptualize or respond to such technologies when deployed in the context of malaria control programmes. Drawing upon existing interpretive frames and locally-resonant analogies when deploying such technologies may provide a basis for more durable public support in the future.

Abstract Background Outdoor and early evening mosquito biting needs to be addressed if malaria elimination is to be achieved. While indoor-targeted interventions, such as insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying, remain essential, complementary approaches that tackle persisting outdoor transmission are urgently required to maximize the impact. Major malaria vectors principally bite human hosts around the feet and ankles. Consequently, this study investigated whether sandals treated with efficacious spatial repellents can protect against outdoor biting mosquitoes. Methodology Sandals affixed with hessian bands measuring 48 cm2 treated with 0.06 g, 0.10 g and 0.15 g of transfluthrin were tested in large cage semi-field and full field experiments. Sandals affixed with hessian bands measuring 240 cm2 and treated with 0.10 g and 0.15 g of transfluthrin were also tested semi field experiments. Human landing catches (HLC) were used to assess reduction in biting exposure by comparing proportions of mosquitoes landing on volunteers wearing treated and untreated sandals. Sandals were tested against insectary reared Anopheles arabiensis mosquitoes in semi-field experiments and against wild mosquito species in rural Tanzania. Results In semi-field tests, sandals fitted with hessian bands measuring 48 cm2 and treated with 0.15 g, 0.10 g and 0.06 g transfluthrin reduced mosquito landings by 45.9%, (95% confidence interval (C.I.) 28–59%), 61.1% (48–71%), and 25.9% (9–40%), respectively compared to untreated sandals. Sandals fitted with hessian bands measuring 240 cm2 and treated with 0.15 g and 0.10 g transfluthrin reduced mosquito landings by 59% (43–71%) and 64% (48–74%), respectively. In field experiments, sandals fitted with hessian bands measuring 48 cm2 and treated with 0.15 g transfluthrin reduced mosquito landings by 70% (60–76%) against Anopheles gambiae sensu lato, and 66.0% (59–71%) against all mosquito species combined. Conclusion Transfluthrin-treated sandals conferred significant protection against mosquito bites in semi-field and field settings. Further evaluation is recommended for this tool as a potential complementary intervention against malaria. This intervention could be particularly useful for protecting against outdoor exposure to mosquito bites. Additional studies are necessary to optimize treatment techniques and substrates, establish safety profiles and determine epidemiological impact in different settings.

Abstract Background Malaria control in Tanzania currently relies primarily on long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor residual spraying, alongside effective case management and behaviour change communication. This study explored opinions of key stakeholders on the national progress towards malaria elimination, the potential of currently available vector control interventions in helping achieve elimination by 2030, and the need for alternative interventions that could be used to supplement malaria elimination efforts in Tanzania. Methods In this exploratory qualitative study, Focus group discussions were held with policy-makers, regulators, research scientists and community members. Malaria control interventions discussed were: (a) improved housing, (b) larval source management, (c) mass drug administration (MDA) with ivermectin to reduce vector densities, (d) release of modified mosquitoes, including genetically modified or irradiated mosquitoes, (e) targeted spraying of mosquito swarms, and (f) spatial repellents. Results Larval source management and spatial repellents were widely supported across all stakeholder groups, while insecticide-spraying of mosquito swarms was the least preferred. Support for MDA with ivermectin was high among policy makers, regulators and research scientists, but encountered opposition among community members, who instead expressed strong support for programmes to improve housing for poor people in high transmission areas. Policy makers, however, challenged the idea of government-supported housing improvement due to its perceived high costs. Techniques of mosquito modification, specifically those involving gene drives, were viewed positively by community members, policy makers and regulators, but encountered a high degree of scepticism among scientists. Overall, policy-makers, regulators and community members trusted scientists to provide appropriate advice for decision-making. Conclusion Stakeholder opinions regarding alternative malaria interventions were divergent except for larval source management and spatial repellents, for which there was universal support. MDA with ivermectin, housing improvement and modified mosquitoes were also widely supported, though each faced concerns from at least one stakeholder group. While policy-makers, regulators and community members all noted their reliance on scientists to make informed decisions, their reasoning on the benefits and disadvantages of specific interventions included factors beyond technical efficiency. This study suggests the need to encourage and strengthen dialogue between research scientists, policy makers, regulators and communities regarding new interventions.

Abstract Background A nationwide, school, malaria survey was implemented to assess the risk factors of malaria prevalence and bed net use among primary school children in mainland Tanzania. This allowed the mapping of malaria prevalence at council level and assessment of malaria risk factors among school children. Methods A cross-sectional, school, malaria parasitaemia survey was conducted in 25 regions, 166 councils and 357 schools in three phases: (1) August to September 2014; (2) May 2015; and, (3) October 2015. Children were tested for malaria parasites using rapid diagnostic tests and were interviewed about household information, parents’ education, bed net indicators as well as recent history of fever. Multilevel mixed effects logistic regression models were fitted to estimate odds ratios of risk factors for malaria infection and for bed net use while adjusting for school effect. Results In total, 49,113 children were interviewed and tested for malaria infection. The overall prevalence of malaria was 21.6%, ranging from

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

BACKGROUND:The frequency and magnitude of dengue epidemics has increased dramatically throughout the tropics in the past 40 years due to unplanned urbanization, globalization and lack of effective mosquito control. The commercial capital of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam, is now experiencing regular dengue outbreaks. Three dengue serotypes have been detected in Dar es Salaam (DNV 1, 2 and 3). Without adequate vector monitoring and control, further outbreaks will certainly occur. METHODS/FINDINGS:A case series study followed 97 individuals with confirmed dengue fever (NS1 and/or IgM on rapid diagnostic test and/or PCR positive) to their households in Kinondoni, Dar es Salaam during the 2014 outbreak from a random sample of 202 confirmed cases at Mwananyamala Hospital. Kinondoni wards of Manzese, Mwananyamala, Tandale and Mabibo had the highest number of confirmed cases: 18, 13, 13 and 9 respectively. Individuals were interviewed by questionnaire on dengue prevention practices and houses were inspected for mosquito breeding sites to validate a Habitat Suitability Score (HSS). This is a tool devised to predict the productivity of any potential breeding habitats (PBHs) before the rains begin. There were 12 /312 positive Aedes breeding habitats. Drums/barrels, flowerpots and tyres were the most common breeding habitats. The HSS correctly identified 9/12 of Aedes breeding habitats. Larviciding is already conducted in urban Tanzania for malaria control and the HSS may be a useful means to train individuals on productive Aedes aegypti breeding sites should this program be extended to include dengue control. The population remains poorly informed about dengue transmission and prevention: 22% of respondents said dengue is spread from one person to another and 60% first heard about dengue when already sick. Less than 20% of respondents used personal protection and >80% thought bednets protected against dengue. Mobile phones were owned by almost all individuals followed up and have the potential of being the prime medium for dissemination of information on dengue prevention.