Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 14;8(8):e70664. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070664. eCollection 2013.
Mosquito vectors of malaria in Southeast Asia readily feed outdoors making malaria control through indoor insecticides such as long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying more difficult. Topical insect repellents may be able to protect users from outdoor biting, thereby providing additional protection above the current best practice of LLINs.
A double blind, household randomised, placebo-controlled trial of insect repellent to reduce malaria was carried out in southern Lao PDR to determine whether the use of repellent and long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) could reduce malaria more than LLINs alone. A total of 1,597 households, including 7,979 participants, were recruited in June 2009 and April 2010. Equal group allocation, stratified by village, was used to randomise 795 households to a 15% DEET lotion and the remainder were given a placebo lotion. Participants, field staff and data analysts were blinded to the group assignment until data analysis had been completed. All households received new LLINs. Participants were asked to apply their lotion to exposed skin every evening and sleep under the LLINs each night. Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax cases were actively identified by monthly rapid diagnostic tests. Intention to treat analysis found no effect from the use of repellent on malaria incidence (hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99-1.01, p = 0.868). A higher socio-economic score was found to significantly decrease malaria risk (hazard ratio: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.90, p = 0.004). Women were also found to have a reduced risk of infection (hazard ratio: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37-0.92, p = 0.020). According to protocol analysis which excluded participants using the lotions less than 90% of the time found similar results with no effect from the use of repellent.
This randomised controlled trial suggests that topical repellents are not a suitable intervention in addition to LLINs against malaria amongst agricultural populations in southern Lao PDR. These results are also likely to be applicable to much of the Greater Mekong Sub-region.
This trial is registered with number NCT00938379.
东南亚的疟疾传播媒介蚊子在户外觅食,这使得通过室内杀虫剂(如长效驱虫蚊帐(LLINs)和室内滞留喷洒)进行疟疾控制变得更加困难。局部驱虫剂可能能够保护使用者免受户外蚊虫叮咬,从而在当前使用 LLINs 的最佳实践之上提供额外的保护。
在老挝南部进行了一项双盲、家庭随机、安慰剂对照的驱虫剂减少疟疾试验,以确定使用驱虫剂和长效驱虫蚊帐(LLINs)是否比单独使用 LLINs 更能减少疟疾。2009 年 6 月和 2010 年 4 月共招募了 1597 户家庭,包括 7979 名参与者。按村庄分层进行均等分组分配,将 795 户随机分配到 15%的 DEET 乳液组,其余的则分到安慰剂乳液组。参与者、现场工作人员和数据分析人员在数据分析完成之前对分组分配情况保持盲态。所有家庭都收到了新的 LLINs。参与者被要求每晚将乳液涂抹在暴露的皮肤上,并每晚在 LLINs 下睡觉。每月使用快速诊断测试主动发现恶性疟原虫和间日疟原虫病例。意向治疗分析发现驱虫剂的使用对疟疾发病率没有影响(风险比:1.00,95%CI:0.99-1.01,p=0.868)。发现较高的社会经济评分显著降低疟疾风险(风险比:0.72,95%CI:0.58-0.90,p=0.004)。还发现女性感染的风险降低(风险比:0.59,95%CI:0.37-0.92,p=0.020)。根据排除了使用乳液时间不足 90%的参与者的方案分析,也得到了类似的结果,驱虫剂的使用没有效果。
这项随机对照试验表明,在老挝南部的农业人群中,局部驱虫剂作为除长效驱虫蚊帐(LLINs)以外的疟疾控制干预措施并不合适。这些结果也可能适用于大湄公河次区域的大部分地区。
该试验在 NCT00938379 下注册。