IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0010033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cost of tsetse control using ‘Tiny Targets’ in the sleeping sickness endemic forest area of Bonon in Côte d’Ivoire: Implications for comparing costs across different settings

Author

Listed:
  • Fabrice Courtin
  • Dramane Kaba
  • Jean-Baptiste Rayaisse
  • Philippe Solano
  • Steve J Torr
  • Alexandra P M Shaw

Abstract

Background: Work to control the gambiense form of human African trypanosomiasis (gHAT), or sleeping sickness, is now directed towards ending transmission of the parasite by 2030. In order to supplement gHAT case-finding and treatment, since 2011 tsetse control has been implemented using Tiny Targets in a number of gHAT foci. As this intervention is extended to new foci, it is vital to understand the costs involved. Costs have already been analysed for the foci of Arua in Uganda and Mandoul in Chad. This paper examines the costs of controlling Glossina palpalis palpalis in the focus of Bonon in Côte d’Ivoire from 2016 to 2017. Methodology/Principal findings: Some 2000 targets were placed throughout the main gHAT transmission area of 130 km2 at a density of 14.9 per km2. The average annual cost was USD 0.5 per person protected, USD 31.6 per target deployed of which 12% was the cost of the target itself, or USD 471.2 per km2 protected. Broken down by activity, 54% was for deployment and maintenance of targets, 34% for tsetse surveys/monitoring and 12% for sensitising populations. Conclusions/Significance: The cost of tsetse control per km2 of the gHAT focus protected in Bonon was more expensive than in Chad or Uganda, while the cost per km2 treated, that is the area where the targets were actually deployed, was cheaper. Per person protected, the Bonon cost fell between the two, with Uganda cheaper and Chad more expensive. In Bonon, targets were deployed throughout the protected area, because G. p. palpalis was present everywhere, whereas in Chad and Uganda G. fuscipes fuscipes was found only the riverine fringing vegetation. Thus, differences between gHAT foci, in terms of tsetse ecology and human geography, impact on the cost-effectiveness of tsetse control. It also demonstrates the need to take into account both the area treated and protected alongside other impact indicators, such as the cost per person protected. Author summary: Sleeping sickness is a fatal disease in Africa caused by trypanosomes transmitted by the bite of infected tsetse flies. The World Health Organization has set the absence of new infections as a goal for 2030. To achieve this, screening and treatment of patients is supplemented by tsetse control. Tiny Targets are small insecticide-impregnated panels of blue cloth and black netting which attract and kill tsetse. To maintain the momentum in these last stages of eliminating the disease, it is important to understand the costs of vector control. This paper presents the results of two years’ cost monitoring in Bonon, an area covering 130 km2, home to 120,000 people. Since 2016, ~2,000 Tiny Targets have been deployed annually at a cost of USD 471 per km2 per year. Bonon is a degraded forested area and a relatively high number of targets was required as tsetse are present throughout. Nevertheless, the cost comes to only USD 0.5 per person protected per year. Compared to operations using Tiny Targets in Uganda and Chad, the cost was higher per km2 protected, reflecting the need to place targets throughout the area, but low per person protected compared to Chad, highlighting the need to use a range of comparators.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabrice Courtin & Dramane Kaba & Jean-Baptiste Rayaisse & Philippe Solano & Steve J Torr & Alexandra P M Shaw, 2022. "The cost of tsetse control using ‘Tiny Targets’ in the sleeping sickness endemic forest area of Bonon in Côte d’Ivoire: Implications for comparing costs across different settings," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0010033
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0010033
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0010033&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0010033. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.