Garjito Triwibowo Ambar, Susanti Lulus, Mujiyono Mujiyono, Prihatin Mega Tyas, Susilo Dwi, Nugroho Sidiq Setyo, Mujiyanto Mujiyanto, Wigati Raden Ajeng, Satoto Tri Baskoro Tunggul, Manguin Sylvie, Gavotte Laurent, Frutos Roger
Institute for Vector and Reservoir Control Research and Development, National Institute of Health Research and Development, The Ministry of Health of Indonesia, Salatiga, Indonesia.
Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Jun 8;8:685926. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.685926. eCollection 2021.
Several methods exist to collect and assess the abundance of dengue vector mosquitoes, i.e., morning adult collection, pupal collection, ovitraps, human landing, and larval collection. Several of these methods are officially implemented to monitor mosquito density and make decisions on treatments for dengue control. This monitoring is also constrained by the need to conduct this assessment on a "one point/one day" process, meaning that once the threshold of 100 households is reached, the assessment is made, and the collectors teams move to another place, thus preventing the use of long-term sampling methods. This diversity of methods might be a source of variability and lack of statistical significance. There is also a lack of published data regarding the efficacy of these methods. Furthermore, the indices are shown to be not reliable for assessing the risk of dengue outbreaks. A mosquito survey was, thus, conducted in 39 locations corresponding to 15 dengue endemic provinces in Indonesia by using the different adult and larval collection methods recommended nationwide. A total of 44,675 mosquitoes were collected. The single larva method was the most efficient. Out of a total of 89 dengue-positive pools, the most frequently encountered virus was DENV2, which made up half of the positive samples, followed by DENV3 and DENV1, respectively. Factor analysis of mixed data showed that no correlation could be found between any methods and the presence of dengue virus in mosquitoes. Moreover, no correlation could be found between any methods and the incidence of dengue. There was no consistency in the efficacy of a given method from one site to another. There was no correlation between any of the parameters considered, i.e., method, incidence of dengue, location, and the presence of dengue virus in mosquitoes.
存在多种收集和评估登革热媒介蚊子数量的方法,即清晨成蚊收集、蛹收集、诱蚊产卵器、人饵诱捕和幼虫收集。其中几种方法已正式实施,用于监测蚊子密度并做出登革热防控治疗决策。这种监测还受到在“一点/一天”流程中进行评估的限制,这意味着一旦达到100户的阈值,就进行评估,收集团队便转移到另一个地方,从而无法使用长期抽样方法。方法的多样性可能是变异性的来源且缺乏统计学意义。关于这些方法的有效性也缺乏已发表的数据。此外,这些指标被证明在评估登革热暴发风险方面不可靠。因此,通过使用全国推荐的不同成蚊和幼虫收集方法,在印度尼西亚15个登革热流行省份对应的39个地点进行了蚊子调查。共收集到44,675只蚊子。单幼虫法效率最高。在总共89个登革热阳性样本中,最常遇到的病毒是登革热病毒2型(DENV2),占阳性样本的一半,其次分别是登革热病毒3型(DENV3)和登革热病毒1型(DENV1)。混合数据的因子分析表明,任何方法与蚊子中登革热病毒的存在之间均未发现相关性。此外,任何方法与登革热发病率之间也未发现相关性。从一个地点到另一个地点,给定方法的有效性不一致。所考虑的任何参数之间,即方法、登革热发病率、地点和蚊子中登革热病毒的存在之间均无相关性。