This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!
Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log in
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Feb;84(2):208-17.
doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.09-0615.

Initial assessment of the acceptability of a Push-Pull Aedes aegypti control strategy in Iquitos, Peru and Kanchanaburi, Thailand

Affiliations

Initial assessment of the acceptability of a Push-Pull Aedes aegypti control strategy in Iquitos, Peru and Kanchanaburi, Thailand

Valerie A Paz-Soldan et al. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011 Feb.

Abstract

As part of a larger research program evaluating chemical threshold levels for a Push-Pull intervention to reduce man-vector (Aedes aegypti) contact, this qualitative study explored local perceptions and strategies associated with mosquito control within dengue-endemic communities in Peru and Thailand. Focus groups were used to provide preliminary information that would identify possible public acceptance issues to the Push-Pull strategy in each site. Nine focus group discussions (total of 102 individuals) conducted between September 2008 and March 2009 examined several themes: 1) current mosquito control practices; 2) perceptions of spatial repellency and contact irritancy versus killing mosquitoes; and 3) initial perceptions toward mosquito host-seeking traps. Results indicate participants use household-level strategies for insect control that reveal familiarity with the concept of spatial repellent and contact irritant actions of chemicals and that placing traps in the peridomestic environment to remove repelled mosquitoes was acceptable. Preliminary evidence suggests a Push-Pull strategy should be well accepted in these locations. These results will be beneficial for developing future large scale push-pull interventions and are currently being used to guide insecticide application strategies in (entomological) proof-of-concept studies using experimental huts.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for this study was obtained from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) for both locations. In addition, the following IRB approvals were obtained for Peru: U.S. Naval Medical Research Center Detachment in Lima (NMRCD) and Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine. Additional approvals for Thailand came from the Ethical Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health. Approvals were obtained for the recruitment scripts, consent forms, and the focus group guides. All human subjects gave informed consent to participating in the study and to having the session audio-taped prior to the start of the focus group discussions: in Peru, all human subjects gave oral informed consent for both participation and audiotaping, whereas in Thailand, all human subjects gave written consent to participation and audiotaping. Author Kirk Mundal is a U.S. military service member. This work was prepared as part of his official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. § 105 provides that ‘Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government’. Title 17 U.S.C. § 101 defines a U.S. Government work as a work prepared by a military service members or employees of the U.S. Government as part of those person's official duties.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Iquitos, Peru study location from which inhabitants of the two neighborhoods, Maynas and Tupac Amaru, were recruited for participation in focus group discussions.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Kanchanaburi, Thailand study location from which inhabitants of Ban Lad Yaa within the Muang District were recruited for participation in focus group discussions.

References

    1. Farrar J, Focks D, Gubler D, Barrera R, Guzman MG, Simmons C, Kalayanarooj S, Lum L, McCall PJ, Lloyd L, Horstick O, Dayal-Drager R, Nathan MB, Kroeger A. Towards a global dengue research agenda. Trop Med Int Health. 2007;12:695–699. WHO/TDR Dengue Scientific Working Group. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kroeger A, Nathan MB. Dengue: setting the global research agenda. Lancet. 2006;368:2193–2195. - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization (WHO) Dengue and Dengue Haemorrhagic Fever. 2009. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs117/en/ Fact Sheet No. 117. Available at. Accessed March 6, 2009.
    1. WHO Report on Dengue. Scientific Working Group, Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases. 2006. http://www.who.int/tdr/publications/tdr-research-publications/swg-report... Available at. Accessed January 5, 2009.
    1. WHO . Dengue haemorrhagic fever: diagnosis, treatment, prevention and control. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007.

Publication types

Cite

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /