IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0070664.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Topical Insect Repellents Reduce Malaria? A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial of the Insect Repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET) in Lao PDR

Author

Listed:
  • Vanessa Chen-Hussey
  • Ilona Carneiro
  • Hongkham Keomanila
  • Rob Gray
  • Sihamano Bannavong
  • Saysana Phanalasy
  • Steven W Lindsay

Abstract

Background: Mosquito vectors of malaria in Southeast Asia readily feed outdoors making malaria control through indoor insecticides such as long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying more difficult. Topical insect repellents may be able to protect users from outdoor biting, thereby providing additional protection above the current best practice of LLINs. Methods and Findings: A double blind, household randomised, placebo-controlled trial of insect repellent to reduce malaria was carried out in southern Lao PDR to determine whether the use of repellent and long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) could reduce malaria more than LLINs alone. A total of 1,597 households, including 7,979 participants, were recruited in June 2009 and April 2010. Equal group allocation, stratified by village, was used to randomise 795 households to a 15% DEET lotion and the remainder were given a placebo lotion. Participants, field staff and data analysts were blinded to the group assignment until data analysis had been completed. All households received new LLINs. Participants were asked to apply their lotion to exposed skin every evening and sleep under the LLINs each night. Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax cases were actively identified by monthly rapid diagnostic tests. Intention to treat analysis found no effect from the use of repellent on malaria incidence (hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99–1.01, p = 0.868). A higher socio-economic score was found to significantly decrease malaria risk (hazard ratio: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.90, p = 0.004). Women were also found to have a reduced risk of infection (hazard ratio: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37–0.92, p = 0.020). According to protocol analysis which excluded participants using the lotions less than 90% of the time found similar results with no effect from the use of repellent. Conclusions: This randomised controlled trial suggests that topical repellents are not a suitable intervention in addition to LLINs against malaria amongst agricultural populations in southern Lao PDR. These results are also likely to be applicable to much of the Greater Mekong Sub-region. Trial Registration: This trial is registered with number NCT00938379

Suggested Citation

  • Vanessa Chen-Hussey & Ilona Carneiro & Hongkham Keomanila & Rob Gray & Sihamano Bannavong & Saysana Phanalasy & Steven W Lindsay, 2013. "Can Topical Insect Repellents Reduce Malaria? A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial of the Insect Repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET) in Lao PDR," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-8, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0070664
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0070664
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0070664&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0070664?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:pone00:0070664. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.