Evidence Hub

Will a lack of fabric durability be their downfall? Impact of textile durability on the efficacy of three types of dual-active-ingredient long-lasting insecticidal nets: a secondary analysis on malaria prevalence and incidence from a cluster-randomized trial in north-west Tanzania

E. Lukole, Jackie Cook, J. Mosha, E. Mallya, Tatu Aziz, Manisha A. Kulkarni, N. Matowo, Jackline L. Martin et al.

Malaria Journal, 2024

7 citations

Abstract

Background The Dual-Active Ingredient long-lasting insecticidal nets (Dual-AI LLIN) have been developed to counteract the reduced efficacy of pyrethroid (PY)-only nets due to widespread pyrethroid insecticide resistance in malaria vector mosquitoes. They constitute half of the nets distributed in sub-Saharan Africa between 2022 and 2024. However, their effectiveness once they develop holes is unclear, particularly in pyrethroid-resistant settings. This study evaluates the textile integrity of three dual- AI LLINs compared to standard PY LLN, over 3 years of use in a community in Tanzania and the associated impact on malaria prevalence and incidence. Methods A secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in North-western Tanzania was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of α-cypermethrin only; pyriproxyfen and α-cypermethrin (PPF-PY); chlorfenapyr and α-cypermethrin (chlorfenapyr-PY); and the synergist piperonyl butoxide and permethrin (PBO-PY) LLINs on malaria infection prevalence and case incidence. The association between the net textile condition and 1/malaria prevalence over 3 years of use between 2019 and 2022, and 2/malaria case incidence in a cohort of children over 2 years of follow-up was assessed between 2019 and 2021. Results There was no significant association between damaged (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.71–1.37, p-value = 0.655) and too-torn (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.77–1.47, p-value = 0.694) compared to intact nets on malaria prevalence for all net…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free