Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Percentage of reduction of vectorial capacity and reproduction at 10% coverage with vector control or drug related interventions

From: Models of effectiveness of interventions against malaria transmitted by Anopheles albimanus

Intervention Active ingredient Evening location of people (until bed time) An. albimanus northern and central Haiti An. albimanus Dame Marie An albimanus Laborde An. gambiae
IRS Bendiocarb Inside 7.21 7.17 7.17 18.15
   Outside 0.40 2.74 5.13 17.41
  DDT Inside 6.55 6.55 6.55 17.27
   Outside 0.55 2.96 4.95 17.08
  δ Inside 2.44 2.49 2.49 22.38a
   Outside 0.04 0.66 1.55 21.27a
  λ Inside NA NA NA 9.77
   Outside NA NA NA 9.36
ITNs λ Inside 0.62 4.17 7.94 34.24
   Outside 1.82 5.06 7.51 33.30
House screening NA Inside 11.35 11.35 11.35 6.60
   Outside 0.97 5.17 8.61 6.25
LSM NA NA 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
RTS,S vaccination NA NA 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70
Test and treat NA NA 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47
Case management NA NA 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30
  1. IRS indoor residual spray, ITNs insecticide treated nets, LSM larval source management, δ deltamethrin, λ lambdacyhalothrin, NA not applicable/available
  2. aParameterized using data from studies with An. albimanus. The impact of vector control is on vectorial capacity, and the impact of human side interventions is on the reproduction number. The impact of higher coverage is approximately proportional to the coverage for most interventions over most of the range (see Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6)