Cargando…
Coverage of indoor residual spraying for malaria control and factors associated with its acceptability in Nasarawa State, North-Central Nigeria
INTRODUCTION: Indoor residual spraying (IRS) is among the major vector control strategies recommended for endemic populations by the World Health Organization (WHO). The success of IRS requires high coverage which is dependent on its acceptability. In Nigeria, IRS pilots have been ongoing and reject...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The African Field Epidemiology Network
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6711672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31489062 http://dx.doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.33.84.13212 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Indoor residual spraying (IRS) is among the major vector control strategies recommended for endemic populations by the World Health Organization (WHO). The success of IRS requires high coverage which is dependent on its acceptability. In Nigeria, IRS pilots have been ongoing and rejection has been a major setback to its coverage. We assessed coverage of IRS and determined factors associated with its acceptability in Nasarawa Eggon district, Nasarawa state, Nigeria METHODS: A cross-sectional survey involving 409 households selected using multi-stage sampling was carried out. Trained data collectors administered pre-tested structured questionnaire to collect data on socio-demographic characteristics of household heads or their representatives, their perceptions on IRS and factors associated with IRS acceptability. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were done at 5% level of significance. RESULTS: Majority of respondents were male (79.7%) and married (82.6%), and their mean age was 36.4 ± 13.3 years. Coverage of IRS was 99.3%. However, only 82.6% of those who previously accepted IRS were willing to accept it in again. Factors independently associated with acceptability were perceived effectiveness of IRS (aOR = 21.8; 95%CI = 6.9-68.8) and lower household cost of malaria prevention after IRS (aOR = 5.0; 95%CI = 1.1-21.8) CONCLUSION: IRS coverage in the communities studied met WHO minimum standard of 85%. However, for similar results to be achieved in future, acceptability must be promoted by providing information on its effectiveness and its ability to reduce household cost of malaria prevention. |
---|