A randomized and controlled comparison of the wash-resistances and insecticidal efficacies of four types of deltamethrin-treated nets, over a 6-month period of domestic use with washing every 2 weeks, in a rural area of Iran
Disease Control and Vector Biology Unit, Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK. Pathogens and Global Health
(Impact Factor: 1.66).
10/2007; 101(6):519-28. DOI: 10.1179/136485907X193815
In a randomized, prospective, 6-month-long field study in a rural area of Iran, the wash resistances of 200 nets (40 PermaNet, 40 Yorkool and 40 A-Z nets), that their manufacturers claimed be long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN), were compared with those of 40 nets conventionally treated with deltamethrin (using K-O Tab tablets). All the nets were kept in routine domestic use and subjected to standardized hand-washing at 2-week intervals. Wild-caught or laboratory-reared Anopheles stephensi were used for the bio-assays of insecticidal activity. The regular washing and domestic use led to reductions in the insecticidal activities of all the treated nets after 6 months. Although the PermaNet nets showed the smallest reduction, they were not significantly better than the conventionally treated nets, which still showed acceptable insecticidal activity after 6 months. The PermaNet and A-Z nets both performed significantly better than the Yorkool nets, which were slightly but not significantly worse than the conventionally treated nets. In questionnaire-based interviews, the local householders were found to wash their own (non-study) nets at median and mean frequencies of every 2 and 2.1 weeks, respectively. In conclusion, the PermaNet nets showed better wash resistance than any of the other commercial nets, and were the only commercial nets tested that truly appeared to be LLIN. There still appears to be scope, however, for the impregnation, and thus the wash-resistance, of even the PermaNet nets to be improved.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.