IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0126187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No Difference in the Incidence of Malaria in Human-Landing Mosquito Catch Collectors and Non-Collectors in a Senegalese Village with Endemic Malaria

Author

Listed:
  • Amélé N Wotodjo
  • Jean-François Trape
  • Vincent Richard
  • Souleymane Doucouré
  • Nafissatou Diagne
  • Adama Tall
  • Ousmane Ndiath
  • Ngor Faye
  • Jean Gaudart
  • Christophe Rogier
  • Cheikh Sokhna

Abstract

Background: The human landing catches is the gold standard method used to study the vectors of malaria and to estimate their aggressiveness. However, this method has raised safety concerns due to a possible increased risk of malaria or other mosquito-borne diseases among the mosquito collectors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of malaria attacks among mosquito collectors and to compare these results with those of non-collectors in a Senegalese village. Methods: From July 1990 to December 2011, a longitudinal malaria study involving mosquito collectors and non-collectors was performed in Dielmo village, Senegal. During the study period, 4 drugs were successively used to treat clinical malaria, and long-lasting insecticide-treated nets were offered to all villagers in July 2008. No malaria chemoprophylaxis was given to mosquito collectors. Incidence of uncomplicated clinical malaria and asymptomatic malaria infection were analyzed among these two groups while controlling for confounding factors associated with malaria risk in random effects negative binomial and logistic regression models, respectively. Results: A total of 3,812 person-trimester observations of 199 adults at least 15 years of age were analyzed. Clinical malaria attacks accounted for 6.3% both in collectors and non-collectors, and asymptomatic malaria infections accounted for 21% and 20% in collectors and non-collectors, respectively. A non-significant lower risk of malaria was observed in the collector group in comparison with the non-collector group after adjusting for other risk factors of malaria and endemicity level (Clinical malaria: adjusted incidence rate ratio = 0.89; 95% confidence interval = 0.65-1.22; p= 0.47). Conclusion: Being a mosquito collector in Dielmo was not significantly associated with an increased risk of malaria both under holoendemic, mesoendemic and hypoendemic conditions of malaria epidemiology. This result supports the view that HLC, the most accurate method for evaluating malaria transmission, may be used without health concerns in Dielmo.

Suggested Citation

  • Amélé N Wotodjo & Jean-François Trape & Vincent Richard & Souleymane Doucouré & Nafissatou Diagne & Adama Tall & Ousmane Ndiath & Ngor Faye & Jean Gaudart & Christophe Rogier & Cheikh Sokhna, 2015. "No Difference in the Incidence of Malaria in Human-Landing Mosquito Catch Collectors and Non-Collectors in a Senegalese Village with Endemic Malaria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0126187
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126187
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126187&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0126187?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:pone00:0126187. 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.