Social Acceptability and Durability of Two Different House Screening Interventions against Exposure to Malaria Vectors, Plasmodium falciparum Infection, and Anemia in Children in The Gambia, West Africa

書誌事項

公開日
2010-11-05
DOI
  • 10.4269/ajtmh.2010.10-0311
公開者
American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

この論文をさがす

説明

<jats:p>The social acceptability and durability of two house screening interventions were addressed using focus group discussions, questionnaires, indoor climate measurements, and durability surveys. Participants recognized that screening stopped mosquitoes (79–96%) and other insects (86–98%) entering their houses. These and other benefits were appreciated by significantly more recipients of full screening than users of screened ceilings. Full screened houses were 0.26°C hotter at night (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.05) than houses with screened ceilings and 0.51°C (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < 0.001) hotter than houses with no screening (28.43°C), though only 9% of full screened house users and 17% of screened ceiling users complained about the heat. Although 71% of screened doors and 85% of ceilings had suffered some damage after 12 months, the average number of holes of any size was < 5 for doors and < 7 for ceilings. In conclusion, house screening is a well-appreciated and durable vector control tool.</jats:p>

収録刊行物

被引用文献 (1)*注記

もっと見る

問題の指摘

ページトップへ