Endriyas Misganu, Kassa Mekidm, Melka Mintesinot, Gebru Agegnehu, Chisha Yilma
South Ethiopia Public Health Institute, Jinka, Ethiopia.
College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arbaminch University, Arbaminch, Ethiopia.
Front Public Health. 2025 Aug 21;13:1561037. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1561037. eCollection 2025.
Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are the main vector control tools and remain protective against malaria, even in the presence of high pyrethroid resistance. However, in sub-Saharan Africa, the estimated percentage of the population sleeping under LLINs is low. Hence, this qualitative study was conducted to explore perceptions about LLINs and the reasons for low LLIN use in southern Ethiopia.
Qualitative cross-sectional study was conducted in southern Ethiopia. Study areas were selected based on low LLIN use following a quantitative survey. Seven focus group discussions (FGDs) with a total of 52 discussants were conducted. Data were managed manually using Microsoft Word and were analyzed thematically.
The themes that emerged were ownership of LLINs, perceived lifespan of LLINs, uses of LLINs, reasons for LLIN non-use, and recommendations. Participants indicated low LLIN coverage and interrupted maintenance supply. The pattern of LLIN utilization varied between groups, as some said it was improving while others said it was decreasing. The expected life span of LLINs reported varied from a minimum of 3 months to a maximum of 3 years. Discussants from all FGDs described that the possibility of discarding or repurposing LLINs is high when it does not kill mosquitoes. Some discussants added the finding that ineffectiveness was worsened by exposing LLINs to direct sunlight to decrease suffocation. All FGD discussants agreed that the main reason for not using LLINs was a lack of awareness, which in turn caused negligence. Some groups in pastoralist areas added the perception that LLINs do not protect from malaria as a reason for non-use.
The low LLIN use and high repurposing practices were noted due to different reasons, including low awareness, negligence, ineffectiveness of LLINs in killing mosquitoes, and others. LLINs are repurposed mainly for covering different things and making ties. Continuous awareness creation activities and corrective measures might improve LLIN coverage and use.
长效驱虫蚊帐（LLINs）是主要的病媒控制工具，即使在拟除虫菊酯抗性很高的情况下，仍能预防疟疾。然而，在撒哈拉以南非洲，睡在长效驱虫蚊帐下的人口估计比例较低。因此，开展了这项定性研究，以探讨埃塞俄比亚南部对长效驱虫蚊帐的看法以及长效驱虫蚊帐使用率低的原因。
在埃塞俄比亚南部进行了定性横断面研究。根据定量调查中长效驱虫蚊帐使用率低的情况选择研究区域。进行了7次焦点小组讨论（FGDs），共有52名参与者。数据使用Microsoft Word手动管理，并进行主题分析。
出现的主题有长效驱虫蚊帐的所有权、对长效驱虫蚊帐使用寿命的认知、长效驱虫蚊帐的用途、不使用长效驱虫蚊帐的原因以及建议。参与者指出长效驱虫蚊帐覆盖率低且维护供应中断。不同群体之间长效驱虫蚊帐的使用模式各不相同，一些人表示正在改善，而另一些人则表示正在下降。报告的长效驱虫蚊帐预期使用寿命从最短3个月到最长3年不等。所有焦点小组讨论的参与者都描述说，当长效驱虫蚊帐无法杀死蚊子时，丢弃或重新利用它的可能性很高。一些参与者补充说，将长效驱虫蚊帐暴露在直射阳光下以减少窒息会使蚊帐的无效性更加严重。所有焦点小组讨论的参与者都认为不使用长效驱虫蚊帐的主要原因是缺乏认识，这反过来又导致了疏忽。牧区的一些群体补充说，认为长效驱虫蚊帐不能预防疟疾也是不使用的一个原因。
由于多种原因，包括认识不足、疏忽、长效驱虫蚊帐杀蚊效果不佳等，长效驱虫蚊帐的使用率较低且重新利用的情况很普遍。长效驱虫蚊帐主要被重新用于覆盖不同物品和制作绳索。持续开展提高认识活动和采取纠正措施可能会提高长效驱虫蚊帐的覆盖率和使用率。
