Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/2445/150451
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Opiyo, Mercy A. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Paaijmans, Krijn P. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-02-17T14:15:37Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-02-17T14:15:37Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020-01-17 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1475-2875 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2445/150451 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Malaria prevalence has significantly reduced since 2000, largely due to the scale-up of vector control interventions, mainly indoor residual spraying (IRS) and long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs). Given their success, these tools remain the frontline interventions in the fight against malaria. Their effectiveness relies on three key ingredients: the intervention, the mosquito vector and the end-user. Regarding the intervention, factors such as the insecticide active ingredient(s) used and the durability and/or bio-efficacy of the tool over time are critical. For the vectors, these factors include biting and resting behaviours and the susceptibility to insecticides. Finally, the end-users need to accept and properly use the intervention. Whilst human attitude and behaviour towards LLINs are well-documented both during and after distribution, only initial coverage is monitored for IRS and in a few geographic settings the residual efficacy of the used product. Here, the historical evidence on end-users modifying their wall surfaces post-spraying is presented, a behaviour that has the potential to reduce actual IRS coverage, effectiveness and impact, as fewer people are truly protected. Therefore, clear guidelines on how to monitor IRS acceptability and/or coverage, both before, during and after spraying, are urgently needed as part of the Monitoring and Evaluation of malaria programmes. | - |
dc.format.extent | 6 p. | - |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
dc.language.iso | eng | - |
dc.publisher | BioMed Central | - |
dc.relation.isformatof | Reproducció del document publicat a: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-3102-6 | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Malaria Journal, 2020, vol. 19 | - |
dc.relation.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-3102-6 | - |
dc.rights | cc by (c) Opiyo et al., 2020 | - |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/ | - |
dc.source | Articles publicats en revistes (ISGlobal) | - |
dc.subject.classification | Malària | - |
dc.subject.classification | Insecticides | - |
dc.subject.other | Malaria | - |
dc.subject.other | Insecticides | - |
dc.title | 'We spray and walk away': wall modifications decrease the impact of indoor residual spray campaigns through reductions in post-spray coverage | - |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | - |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | - |
dc.date.updated | 2020-02-14T19:01:23Z | - |
dc.rights.accessRights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31952538 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Articles publicats en revistes (ISGlobal) |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpiyoMA_MalJ_2020.pdf | 915.06 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License