• Lancet · Feb 2021

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Impact and cost-effectiveness of a lethal house lure against malaria transmission in central Côte d'Ivoire: a two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial.

    • Eleanore D Sternberg, Jackie Cook, Ludovic P Ahoua Alou, Serge Brice Assi, Alphonsine A Koffi, Dimi T Doudou, Carine J Aoura, Rosine Z Wolie, Welbeck A Oumbouke, Eve Worrall, Immo Kleinschmidt, Raphael N'Guessan, and Matthew B Thomas.
    • Department of Entomology, Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA; Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom. Electronic address: eleanore.sternberg@lstmed.ac.uk.
    • Lancet. 2021 Feb 27; 397 (10276): 805815805-815.

    BackgroundNew vector control tools are required to sustain the fight against malaria. Lethal house lures, which target mosquitoes as they attempt to enter houses to blood feed, are one approach. Here we evaluated lethal house lures consisting of In2Care (Wageningen, Netherlands) Eave Tubes, which provide point-source insecticide treatments against host-seeking mosquitoes, in combination with house screening, which aims to reduce mosquito entry.MethodsWe did a two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial with 40 village-level clusters in central Côte d'Ivoire between Sept 26, 2016, and April 10, 2019. All households received new insecticide-treated nets at universal coverage (one bednet per two people). Suitable households within the clusters assigned to the treatment group were offered screening plus Eave Tubes, with Eave Tubes treated using a 10% wettable powder formulation of the pyrethroid β-cyfluthrin. Because of the nature of the intervention, treatment could not be masked for households and field teams, but all analyses were blinded. The primary endpoint was clinical malaria incidence recorded by active case detection over 2 years in cohorts of children aged 6 months to 10 years. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18145556.Findings3022 houses received screening plus Eave Tubes, with an average coverage of 70% across the intervention clusters. 1300 eligible children were recruited for active case detection in the control group and 1260 in the intervention group. During the 2-year follow-up period, malaria case incidence was 2·29 per child-year (95% CI 1·97-2·61) in the control group and 1·43 per child-year (1·21-1·65) in the intervention group (hazard ratio 0·62, 95% CI 0·51-0·76; p<0·0001). Cost-effectiveness simulations suggested that screening plus Eave Tubes has a 74·0% chance of representing a cost-effective intervention, compared with existing healthcare activities in Côte d'Ivoire, and is similarly cost-effective to other core vector control interventions across sub-Saharan Africa. No serious adverse events associated with the intervention were reported during follow-up.InterpretationScreening plus Eave Tubes can provide protection against malaria in addition to the effects of insecticide-treated nets, offering potential for a new, cost-effective strategy to supplement existing vector control tools. Additional trials are needed to confirm these initial results and further optimise Eave Tubes and the lethal house lure concept to facilitate adoption.FundingThe Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…