PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Attractive Targeted Sugar Baits (ATSBs) offer a complementary vector control strategy to interventions targeting blood feeding or larval control by attacking the sugar feeding behaviour of adult mosquitoes using an attract-and-kill approach. Western Zambia was the first location to receive and deploy ATSB Sarabi version 1.2 stations in a Phase III cluster randomized controlled trial. This paper describes ATSB station installation, monitoring, removal, and disposal, quantifies ATSB station coverage, and reports major reasons for ATSB station replacement.
METHODS: ATSB stations were deployed during two annual transmission seasons, through scheduled installation and removal campaigns. During deployment, monitoring was conducted per protocol to maintain high coverage of the ATSB stations in good condition. Routine monitoring visits during the trial captured details on ATSB station damage necessitating replacement following pre-defined replacement criteria. Annual cross-sectional household surveys measured ATSB station coverage during peak malaria transmission.
RESULTS: A total of 67,945 ATSB stations were installed in Year 1 (41,695 initially installed+ 26,250 installed during monitoring) and 69,494 ATSB stations were installed in Year 2 (41,982 initially installed+ 27,512 installed during monitoring) across 35 intervention clusters to maintain high coverage of two ATSB stations in good condition per eligible household structure. The primary reasons for ATSB station replacement due to damage were holes/tears and presence of mold. Cross-sectional household surveys documented high coverage of ATSB stations across Year 1 and Year 2 with 93.1% of eligible structures having ≥ 2 ATSB stations in any condition.
CONCLUSIONS: ATSB station deployment and monitoring efforts were conducted in the context of a controlled cRCT to assess potential product efficacy. Damage to ATSB stations during deployment required replacement of a subset of stations. High coverage of eligible structures was maintained over the two-year study despite replacement requirements. Additional research is needed to better understand the impact of damage on ATSB station effectiveness under programmatic conditions, including thresholds of threats to physical integrity and biological deterioration on product efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing ATSB stations to address causes of damage and conducting implementation research to inform optimal delivery and cost-effective deployment will be important to facilitate scale-up of ATSB interventions.
METHODS: ATSB stations were deployed during two annual transmission seasons, through scheduled installation and removal campaigns. During deployment, monitoring was conducted per protocol to maintain high coverage of the ATSB stations in good condition. Routine monitoring visits during the trial captured details on ATSB station damage necessitating replacement following pre-defined replacement criteria. Annual cross-sectional household surveys measured ATSB station coverage during peak malaria transmission.
RESULTS: A total of 67,945 ATSB stations were installed in Year 1 (41,695 initially installed+ 26,250 installed during monitoring) and 69,494 ATSB stations were installed in Year 2 (41,982 initially installed+ 27,512 installed during monitoring) across 35 intervention clusters to maintain high coverage of two ATSB stations in good condition per eligible household structure. The primary reasons for ATSB station replacement due to damage were holes/tears and presence of mold. Cross-sectional household surveys documented high coverage of ATSB stations across Year 1 and Year 2 with 93.1% of eligible structures having ≥ 2 ATSB stations in any condition.
CONCLUSIONS: ATSB station deployment and monitoring efforts were conducted in the context of a controlled cRCT to assess potential product efficacy. Damage to ATSB stations during deployment required replacement of a subset of stations. High coverage of eligible structures was maintained over the two-year study despite replacement requirements. Additional research is needed to better understand the impact of damage on ATSB station effectiveness under programmatic conditions, including thresholds of threats to physical integrity and biological deterioration on product efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing ATSB stations to address causes of damage and conducting implementation research to inform optimal delivery and cost-effective deployment will be important to facilitate scale-up of ATSB interventions.
摘要：
背景：有吸引力的靶向糖饵（ATSB）通过使用吸引和杀死方法攻击成年蚊子的食糖行为，为针对血液喂养或幼虫控制的干预措施提供了补充的媒介控制策略。在III期集群随机对照试验中，赞比亚西部是第一个接收和部署ATSBSarabi1.2版站点的地点。本文介绍了ATSB站的安装,监测,移除,和处置，量化ATSB站的覆盖范围，并报告ATSB站更换的主要原因。
方法：ATSB站在两个年度传输季节部署，通过计划的安装和拆卸活动。在部署期间,按照协议进行监测，以保持ATSB站的高覆盖率处于良好状态。试验期间的例行监测访问捕获了ATSB站损坏的详细信息，需要按照预定义的更换标准进行更换。年度横断面家庭调查测量了疟疾传播高峰期ATSB站的覆盖率。
结果：在第1年共安装了67,945个ATSB站（最初安装了41,695个，在监测期间安装了26,250个），在第2年安装了69,494个ATSB站（最初安装了41,982个，在监测期间安装了27,512个）在35个干预集群中，以保持每个符合条件的家庭结构中两个ATSB由于损坏而更换ATSB站的主要原因是孔/撕裂和模具的存在。横断面住户调查记录了第1年和第2年ATSB站的高覆盖率，其中93.1％的合格建筑物在任何情况下都具有≥2个ATSB站。
结论：在受控cRCT的背景下进行了ATSB站部署和监测工作，以评估潜在的产品疗效。在部署期间对ATSB站的损坏需要更换站的子集。在为期两年的研究中，尽管需要更换，但仍保持了对合格结构的高覆盖率。需要进行更多研究，以更好地了解在计划条件下损坏对ATSB站有效性的影响，包括对产品功效的物理完整性和生物恶化的威胁阈值。
结论：优化ATSB站以解决损害原因，并进行实施研究以告知最佳交付和具有成本效益的部署，对于促进ATSB干预措施的扩大将是重要的。
方法：ATSB站在两个年度传输季节部署，通过计划的安装和拆卸活动。在部署期间,按照协议进行监测，以保持ATSB站的高覆盖率处于良好状态。试验期间的例行监测访问捕获了ATSB站损坏的详细信息，需要按照预定义的更换标准进行更换。年度横断面家庭调查测量了疟疾传播高峰期ATSB站的覆盖率。
结果：在第1年共安装了67,945个ATSB站（最初安装了41,695个，在监测期间安装了26,250个），在第2年安装了69,494个ATSB站（最初安装了41,982个，在监测期间安装了27,512个）在35个干预集群中，以保持每个符合条件的家庭结构中两个ATSB由于损坏而更换ATSB站的主要原因是孔/撕裂和模具的存在。横断面住户调查记录了第1年和第2年ATSB站的高覆盖率，其中93.1％的合格建筑物在任何情况下都具有≥2个ATSB站。
结论：在受控cRCT的背景下进行了ATSB站部署和监测工作，以评估潜在的产品疗效。在部署期间对ATSB站的损坏需要更换站的子集。在为期两年的研究中，尽管需要更换，但仍保持了对合格结构的高覆盖率。需要进行更多研究，以更好地了解在计划条件下损坏对ATSB站有效性的影响，包括对产品功效的物理完整性和生物恶化的威胁阈值。
结论：优化ATSB站以解决损害原因，并进行实施研究以告知最佳交付和具有成本效益的部署，对于促进ATSB干预措施的扩大将是重要的。
