Protecting migratory farmers in rural Tanzania using eave ribbons treated with the spatial mosquito repellent, transfluthrin

Table 2 Protection conferred indoors and outdoors against anopheline and culicine species in all three rice farms when 1.5% transfluthrin-treated eave ribbons were fitted along the eaves of rice farm huts

Mosquito species	Treatment	Indoors				Outdoors
Mosquito species	Treatment	Total number	Geometric mean (LCI-UCI)	% protection (LCI-UCI)	p value	Total number	Geometric mean (LCI-UCI)	% Protection (LCI-UCI)	p value
Anopheles arabiensis	Untreated	2526	9.4 (8.0–11.0)	–	< 0.001	135	1.7 (1.4–2.0)	–	0.034
Anopheles arabiensis	1.5% transfluthrin	1131	4.8 (4.2–5.5)	56 (47–64)	< 0.001	80	1.3 (1.1–1.6)	38 (3–60)	0.034
Anopheles funestus	Untreated	751	3.0 (2.5–3.6)	–	0.001	21	1.2 (1.0–1.5)	–	0.413
Anopheles funestus	1.5% transfluthrin	445	2.4 (2.1–2.8)	36 (16–50)	0.001	15	1.2 (1.0–1.5)	–	0.413
Culex species	Untreated	2986	7.8 (6.5–9.3)	–	< 0.001	100	2.0 (1.6–2.5)	–	0.003
Culex species	1.5% transfluthrin	656	3.2 (2.8–3.7)	72 (65–77)	< 0.001	38	1.3 (1.1–1.5)	62 (29–80)
Mansonia species	Untreated	3510	12.9 (10.8–15.5)	–	< 0.001	290	2.3 (1.9–2.7)	–	0.001
	1.5% transfluthrin	628	3.8 (3.2–4.4)	80 (75–85)	< 0.001	150	1.8 (1.5–2.2)	49 (24–66)	0.001

Each treatment arm had 48 nights of sampling. Percentage protective efficacy is estimated for each treatment relative to the respective controls
LCI lower confidence interval, UCI upper confidence interval, p value Walds p value

ISSN: 1475-2875