↓ Skip to main content

Wall-type and indoor residual spraying application quality affect the residual efficacy of indoor residual spray against wild malaria vector in southwest Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Wall-type and indoor residual spraying application quality affect the residual efficacy of indoor residual spray against wild malaria vector in southwest Ethiopia
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2458-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zerihun Desalegn, Teklu Wegayehu, Fekadu Massebo

Abstract

Residual efficacy of indoor residual spray may vary with different spray quality and wall surfaces types. This study evaluated the impact of spray quality and wall surface types on residual efficacy of propoxur against wild Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) in southwest Ethiopia. Thirty houses of different mud wall surfaces (10 smooth, 10 rough, 10 painted) were selected and randomly allocated into routine and standard spray. The routine spray was conducted by district health office as usual, while the standard spray was done by strictly following guidelines. Three control houses were selected from unsprayed nearby semi-urban. Wild An. gambiae s.l. were used for wall bioassay tests. Two-way mixed model analysis of variance was used to analyse the data. The mean variation between wall and spray types was compared by post hoc analysis of IBM SPSS version 20. On standard spray, knockdown rate was 95.3% on painted, 82% on smooth and 72.5% on rough surface at week 17 of post-spray, whereas on routine spray it was 82.7% on painted, 48.7% on smooth and 60% on rough surface. On standard spray, mortality rate of An. gambiae s.l. was 99.3% on painted surface, 90% on smooth and 80% on rough surface. On routine spray, it was 89.3% on painted, 61.3% on smooth and 65% on rough surface at week 17 of post-spray. The painted wall surface showed the highest knockdown rate (86.4-100%) on standard and (73.8-91.5%) routine spray; mortality rate was more than 80% on both spray types during the 17 weeks of follow-up regardless of spray types. The lower mortality rate and residual effect was observed on routine smooth and rough wall surfaces. The residual efficacy of propoxur was > 80% at week 17 on standard spray regardless of the wall types and it was < 80% on routine spray except painted wall surface. The painted wall surface and standard spray showed better residual efficacy. Therefore, it is recommended to consider the wall surface available in the community to estimate the residual lifespan of the insecticide, and strictly to follow the spray guideline to improve the effectiveness of indoor residual spray.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Unspecified 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 10%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 3 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2018.
All research outputs
#10,221,228
of 13,401,480 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,221
of 3,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,082
of 268,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,401,480 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them