Cargando…

Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data

BACKGROUND: Before topical repellents can be employed as interventions against arthropod bites, their efficacy must be established. Currently, laboratory or field tests, using human volunteers, are the main methods used for assessing the efficacy of topical repellents. However, laboratory tests are...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sangoro, Onyango, Lweitojera, Dickson, Simfukwe, Emmanuel, Ngonyani, Hassan, Mbeyela, Edgar, Lugiko, Daniel, Kihonda, Japhet, Maia, Marta, Moore, Sarah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4006452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24767458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-159
_version_ 1782314217913712640
author Sangoro, Onyango
Lweitojera, Dickson
Simfukwe, Emmanuel
Ngonyani, Hassan
Mbeyela, Edgar
Lugiko, Daniel
Kihonda, Japhet
Maia, Marta
Moore, Sarah
author_facet Sangoro, Onyango
Lweitojera, Dickson
Simfukwe, Emmanuel
Ngonyani, Hassan
Mbeyela, Edgar
Lugiko, Daniel
Kihonda, Japhet
Maia, Marta
Moore, Sarah
author_sort Sangoro, Onyango
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Before topical repellents can be employed as interventions against arthropod bites, their efficacy must be established. Currently, laboratory or field tests, using human volunteers, are the main methods used for assessing the efficacy of topical repellents. However, laboratory tests are not representative of real life conditions under which repellents are used and field-testing potentially exposes human volunteers to disease. There is, therefore, a need to develop methods to test efficacy of repellents under real life conditions while minimizing volunteer exposure to disease. METHODS: A lotion-based, 15% N, N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET) repellent and 15% DEET in ethanol were compared to a placebo lotion in a 200 sq m (10 m × 20 m) semi-field system (SFS) against laboratory-reared Anopheles arabiensis mosquitoes and in full field settings against wild malaria vectors and nuisance-biting mosquitoes. The average percentage protection against biting mosquitoes over four hours in the SFS and field setting was determined. A Poisson regression model was then used to determine relative risk of being bitten when wearing either of these repellents compared to the placebo. RESULTS: Average percentage protection of the lotion-based 15% DEET repellent after four hours of mosquito collection was 82.13% (95% CI 75.94-88.82) in the semi-field experiments and 85.10% (95% CI 78.97-91.70) in the field experiments. Average percentage protection of 15% DEET in ethanol after four hours was 71.29% (CI 61.77-82.28) in the semi-field system and 88.24% (84.45-92.20) in the field. CONCLUSIONS: Semi-field evaluation results were comparable to full-field evaluations, indicating that such systems could be satisfactorily used in measuring efficacy of topically applied mosquito repellents, thereby avoiding risks of exposure to mosquito-borne pathogens, associated with field testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4006452
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40064522014-05-19 Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data Sangoro, Onyango Lweitojera, Dickson Simfukwe, Emmanuel Ngonyani, Hassan Mbeyela, Edgar Lugiko, Daniel Kihonda, Japhet Maia, Marta Moore, Sarah Malar J Methodology BACKGROUND: Before topical repellents can be employed as interventions against arthropod bites, their efficacy must be established. Currently, laboratory or field tests, using human volunteers, are the main methods used for assessing the efficacy of topical repellents. However, laboratory tests are not representative of real life conditions under which repellents are used and field-testing potentially exposes human volunteers to disease. There is, therefore, a need to develop methods to test efficacy of repellents under real life conditions while minimizing volunteer exposure to disease. METHODS: A lotion-based, 15% N, N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET) repellent and 15% DEET in ethanol were compared to a placebo lotion in a 200 sq m (10 m × 20 m) semi-field system (SFS) against laboratory-reared Anopheles arabiensis mosquitoes and in full field settings against wild malaria vectors and nuisance-biting mosquitoes. The average percentage protection against biting mosquitoes over four hours in the SFS and field setting was determined. A Poisson regression model was then used to determine relative risk of being bitten when wearing either of these repellents compared to the placebo. RESULTS: Average percentage protection of the lotion-based 15% DEET repellent after four hours of mosquito collection was 82.13% (95% CI 75.94-88.82) in the semi-field experiments and 85.10% (95% CI 78.97-91.70) in the field experiments. Average percentage protection of 15% DEET in ethanol after four hours was 71.29% (CI 61.77-82.28) in the semi-field system and 88.24% (84.45-92.20) in the field. CONCLUSIONS: Semi-field evaluation results were comparable to full-field evaluations, indicating that such systems could be satisfactorily used in measuring efficacy of topically applied mosquito repellents, thereby avoiding risks of exposure to mosquito-borne pathogens, associated with field testing. BioMed Central 2014-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4006452/ /pubmed/24767458 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-159 Text en Copyright © 2014 Sangoro et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Sangoro, Onyango
Lweitojera, Dickson
Simfukwe, Emmanuel
Ngonyani, Hassan
Mbeyela, Edgar
Lugiko, Daniel
Kihonda, Japhet
Maia, Marta
Moore, Sarah
Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title_full Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title_fullStr Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title_full_unstemmed Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title_short Use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
title_sort use of a semi-field system to evaluate the efficacy of topical repellents under user conditions provides a disease exposure free technique comparable with field data
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4006452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24767458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-159
work_keys_str_mv AT sangoroonyango useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT lweitojeradickson useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT simfukweemmanuel useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT ngonyanihassan useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT mbeyelaedgar useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT lugikodaniel useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT kihondajaphet useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT maiamarta useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata
AT mooresarah useofasemifieldsystemtoevaluatetheefficacyoftopicalrepellentsunderuserconditionsprovidesadiseaseexposurefreetechniquecomparablewithfielddata