Tropical Epidemiology Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 13;8(11):e80626. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080626. eCollection 2013.
Previous studies demonstrated that fewer mosquitoes enter houses which are screened or have closed eaves. There is little evidence about the effect on malaria infection in humans that changes in house construction may have. This study examines the impact of protective housing improvements on malaria infection on Bioko Island.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Data from the annual malaria indicator surveys between 2009 and 2012 were used to assess trends in housing characteristics and their effect on RDT confirmed malaria infection in household members. Odds ratios were adjusted for socio-economic status of the household.22726 children between the ages of 2 and 14 years were tested for P. falciparum. Prevalence of infection in those living in houses with open eaves was 23.0% compared to 18.8% for those living in houses with closed eaves (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 - 0.98). The prevalence of infection for children in screened houses was 9.1% versus 20.1% for those living in unscreened houses (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 - 0.71). The proportion of houses with closed eaves increased from 66.0% in 2009 to 74.3% in 2012 (test for trend p = 0.01). The proportion of screened houses remained unchanged over time at 1.3%.
CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: As a malaria control intervention, house modification has the advantages that it is not affected by the growing threat of insecticide resistance; it protects all household members equally and at all times while indoors; and it offers protection against a number of vector borne diseases. The study provides evidence in support of efforts to regulate or encourage housing improvements which impede vector access into residences as part of an integrated vector control approach to complement existing measures which have been only partially successful in reducing malaria transmission in some parts of Bioko.
先前的研究表明,装有纱窗或檐篷关闭的房屋进入的蚊子较少。关于房屋结构的改变可能对人类疟疾感染产生的影响,证据很少。本研究检查了在比奥科岛实施保护性住房改善措施对疟疾感染的影响。
方法/主要发现:使用 2009 年至 2012 年年度疟疾指标调查的数据,评估了房屋特征的变化趋势及其对家庭成员工具检测确诊疟疾感染的影响。对家庭的社会经济地位进行了调整。在年龄为 2 至 14 岁的 22726 名儿童中检测了恶性疟原虫。住在檐篷敞开的房屋中的感染率为 23.0%,而住在檐篷关闭的房屋中的感染率为 18.8%(比值比为 0.81,95%置信区间 0.67-0.98)。住在有纱窗的房屋中的儿童的感染率为 9.1%,而住在没有纱窗的房屋中的儿童的感染率为 20.1%(比值比为 0.44,95%置信区间 0.27-0.71)。2009 年有 66.0%的房屋装有檐篷,到 2012 年增加到 74.3%(趋势检验 p=0.01)。在整个研究期间,装有纱窗的房屋比例保持不变,为 1.3%。
结论/意义:作为一项疟疾控制干预措施,房屋改造具有以下优点:它不受杀虫剂抗药性日益威胁的影响;它在室内始终平等地保护所有家庭成员;它还可以预防多种媒介传播疾病。本研究提供了证据,支持努力规范或鼓励房屋改造,以阻止蚊子进入住所,这是补充现有措施的一个方面,这些措施在比奥科岛的一些地区部分成功地降低了疟疾传播,但在其他地区效果有限。