Cargando…

Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda

BACKGROUND: Insecticide-based tools remain critical for controlling vector-borne diseases in Uganda. Securing public support from targeted populations for such tools is an important component in sustaining their long-run effectiveness. Yet little quantitative evidence is available on the perceived b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brown, Zachary S., Kramer, Randall A., Ocan, David, Oryema, Christine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5053089/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27716420
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40249-016-0190-1
_version_ 1782458349368901632
author Brown, Zachary S.
Kramer, Randall A.
Ocan, David
Oryema, Christine
author_facet Brown, Zachary S.
Kramer, Randall A.
Ocan, David
Oryema, Christine
author_sort Brown, Zachary S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Insecticide-based tools remain critical for controlling vector-borne diseases in Uganda. Securing public support from targeted populations for such tools is an important component in sustaining their long-run effectiveness. Yet little quantitative evidence is available on the perceived benefits and costs of vector control programmes among targeted households. METHODS: A survey was administered to a clustered random sample of 612 households in Gulu and Oyam districts of northern Uganda during a period of very high malaria transmission and following a pilot indoor residual spray (IRS) programme. A discrete choice experiment was conducted within the survey, in which respondents indicated their preferences for different IRS programmes relative to money compensation in a series of experimentally controlled, hypothetical choice sets. The data were analysed using conditional logit regression models to estimate respondents’ willingness to accept (WTA) some amount of money compensation in lieu of foregone malaria risk reductions. Latent class models were used to analyse whether respondent characteristics predicted WTA. RESULTS: Average WTA is estimated at $8.94 annually for a 10 % reduction in malaria risk, and additional co-benefits of IRS were estimated to be worth on average $54–$56 (depending on insecticide type) per round of IRS. Significant heterogeneity is observed: Four in five household heads in northern Uganda have high valuations for IRS programmes, while the remaining 20 % experience costly side effects of IRS (valued at between $2 and $3 per round). Statistically significant predictors of belonging to the high-value group include respondent gender, mean age of household members, participation in previous IRS, basic knowledge of mosquito reproduction, and the number of mosquito nets owned. Proxies for household income and wealth are not found to be statistically significant predictors of WTA. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the majority of people in areas of high malaria transmission like northern Uganda place a high value on vector control programmes using IRS. However, there is significant heterogeneity in terms of the perceived side effects (positive and negative). This has implications for sustaining public support for these programmes in the long-term. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40249-016-0190-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5053089
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50530892016-10-18 Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda Brown, Zachary S. Kramer, Randall A. Ocan, David Oryema, Christine Infect Dis Poverty Research Article BACKGROUND: Insecticide-based tools remain critical for controlling vector-borne diseases in Uganda. Securing public support from targeted populations for such tools is an important component in sustaining their long-run effectiveness. Yet little quantitative evidence is available on the perceived benefits and costs of vector control programmes among targeted households. METHODS: A survey was administered to a clustered random sample of 612 households in Gulu and Oyam districts of northern Uganda during a period of very high malaria transmission and following a pilot indoor residual spray (IRS) programme. A discrete choice experiment was conducted within the survey, in which respondents indicated their preferences for different IRS programmes relative to money compensation in a series of experimentally controlled, hypothetical choice sets. The data were analysed using conditional logit regression models to estimate respondents’ willingness to accept (WTA) some amount of money compensation in lieu of foregone malaria risk reductions. Latent class models were used to analyse whether respondent characteristics predicted WTA. RESULTS: Average WTA is estimated at $8.94 annually for a 10 % reduction in malaria risk, and additional co-benefits of IRS were estimated to be worth on average $54–$56 (depending on insecticide type) per round of IRS. Significant heterogeneity is observed: Four in five household heads in northern Uganda have high valuations for IRS programmes, while the remaining 20 % experience costly side effects of IRS (valued at between $2 and $3 per round). Statistically significant predictors of belonging to the high-value group include respondent gender, mean age of household members, participation in previous IRS, basic knowledge of mosquito reproduction, and the number of mosquito nets owned. Proxies for household income and wealth are not found to be statistically significant predictors of WTA. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the majority of people in areas of high malaria transmission like northern Uganda place a high value on vector control programmes using IRS. However, there is significant heterogeneity in terms of the perceived side effects (positive and negative). This has implications for sustaining public support for these programmes in the long-term. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40249-016-0190-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5053089/ /pubmed/27716420 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40249-016-0190-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Research Article
Brown, Zachary S.
Kramer, Randall A.
Ocan, David
Oryema, Christine
Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title_full Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title_fullStr Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title_full_unstemmed Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title_short Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda
title_sort household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern uganda
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5053089/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27716420
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40249-016-0190-1
work_keys_str_mv AT brownzacharys householdperceptionsandsubjectivevaluationsofindoorresidualsprayingprogrammestocontrolmalariainnorthernuganda
AT kramerrandalla householdperceptionsandsubjectivevaluationsofindoorresidualsprayingprogrammestocontrolmalariainnorthernuganda
AT ocandavid householdperceptionsandsubjectivevaluationsofindoorresidualsprayingprogrammestocontrolmalariainnorthernuganda
AT oryemachristine householdperceptionsandsubjectivevaluationsofindoorresidualsprayingprogrammestocontrolmalariainnorthernuganda