O Programa de Controle do Dengue em São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo, Brasil: dificuldades para a atuação dos agentes e adesão da população

Neto, Francisco Chiaravalloti; Baglini, Virgínia; Cesarino, Marisa B.; Fávaro, Eliane Aparecida; Mondini, Adriano; Ferreira, Aline; Dibo, Margareth Regina; Barbosa, Angelita A. C.; Ferraz, Amena A.

doi:10.1590/s0102-311x2007000700017

Cited by 22 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior research suggests that participation decisions are often driven by factors other than disease prevention, particularly civic duty. 62 63 The most commonly cited barriers to participation included fear of theft during control activities, 64 odours and allergic reactions to insecticide 65 and logistical challenges. 66 67 While community engagement and mobilisation activities were associated with higher rates of participation, 68–70 these strategies have not been evaluated in a randomised trial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing participation in a vector control campaign: a cluster randomised controlled evaluation of behavioural economic interventions in Peru

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of strategies informed by behavioural economics for increasing participation in a vector control campaign, compared with current practice.DesignPragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.SettingArequipa, Peru.Participants4922 households.InterventionsHouseholds were randomised to one of four arms: advanced planning, leader recruitment, contingent group lotteries, or control.Main outcome measuresParticipation (allowing the house to be sprayed with insecticide) during the vector control campaign.ResultsIn intent-to-treat analyses, none of the interventions increased participation compared with control (advanced planning adjusted OR (aOR) 1.07 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.32); leader recruitment aOR 0.95 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.15); group lotteries aOR 1.12 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.39)). The interventions did not improve the efficiency of the campaign (additional minutes needed to spray house from generalised estimating equation regressions: advanced planning 1.08 (95% CI −1.02 to 3.17); leader recruitment 3.91 (95% CI 1.85 to 5.97); group lotteries 3.51 (95% CI 1.38 to 5.64)) nor did it increase the odds that houses would be sprayed in an earlier versus a later stage of the campaign cycle (advanced planning aOR 0.94 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.25); leader recruitment aOR 0.68 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.83); group lotteries aOR 1.19 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.47)). A post hoc analysis suggested that advanced planning increased odds of participation compared with control among households who had declined to participate previously (aOR 2.50 (95% CI 1.41 to 4.43)).ConclusionsAchieving high levels of household participation is crucial for many disease prevention efforts. Our trial was not successful in improving participation compared with the existing campaign. The trial highlights persistent challenges to field experiments as well as lessons about the intervention design process, particularly understanding barriers to participation through a behavioural lens.Trial registration numberAmerican Economic Association AEARCTR-0000620.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing participation in a vector control campaign: a cluster randomised controlled evaluation of behavioural economic interventions in Peru

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An investigation from the state of São Paulo, Brazil, identified aspects that interfere with the local population’s adherence to routinely applied dengue control programs. The authors identified householders’ refusal as the principal problem in different neighbourhoods with distinct socioeconomic classes ( Chiaravalloti-Neto et al 2007 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass trapping with MosquiTRAPs does not reduce Aedes aegypti abundance

Degener

Ázara

Roque

et al. 2015

Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Aedes aegypti mass trapping using the sticky trap MosquiTRAP (MQT) by performing a cluster randomised controlled trial in Manaus, state of Amazonas, Brazil. After an initial questionnaire and baseline monitoring of adult Ae. aegypti abundance with BG-Sentinel (BGS) traps in six clusters, three clusters were randomly assigned to the intervention arm where each participating household received three MQTs for mass trapping during 17 months. The remaining three clusters (control arm) did not receive traps. The effect of mass trapping on adult Ae. aegypti abundance was monitored fortnightly with BGS traps. During the last two months of the study, a serological survey was conducted. After the study, a second questionnaire was applied in the intervention arm. Entomological monitoring indicated that MQT mass trapping did not reduce adult Ae. aegypti abundance. The serological survey indicated that recent dengue infections were equally frequent in the intervention and the control arm. Most participants responded positively to questions concerning user satisfaction. According to the results, there is no evidence that mass trapping with MQTs can be used as a part of dengue control programs. The use of this sticky trap is only recommendable for dengue vector monitoring.

show abstract

“…The strategies used to transmit information may not be adequate, since they have failed to result in changes in practices to foster the maintenance of indoor and outdoor household environments free of mosquito breeding sites 57,58,59 .…”

Section: Limits and Challenges For Dengue Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%