Development of Smartphone-Based Early Alerts and Mosquito Monitoring System and Geographic Instrument System Applications

Abstract

BACKGROUND: At present, dengue fever is a threat to society and causes rapid death. Aedes aegypti mosquito bites can transmit disease to the public. Environmental factors in society are the primary role that can transmit Dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF). AIM: Creating a survey system using a smartphone for early alertness to larva monitoring in the Darul Imarah sub-district, Aceh Besar district. METHODS: This study used a descriptive quantitative approach which was carried out by the survey method. The research location is located in Darul Imarah District, Aceh Besar District. Primary data contain the value of the Container index (CI), House index (HI), and Breteau index (BI). This study’s population was all cadres of Juru Jentik (jumantik) in the area of Darul Imarah District, AcehBesar District. The sample in this study was taken from a cadre of larva monitoring officers (jumantik) in the district of Darul Imarah, Aceh Besar. The data collection stage includes data collection of DHF cases from the Puskesmas and data entry. Then proceed with taking the coordinates of the research location and entering the HI and CI, and News Index (BI) data. Data collection begins with data buffering, grouping, and kernel density to be processed into Geographics Instrument System (GIS)-based data. then Analyze descriptive data to describe Smartphone Link. Next, Analytical Analysis of GIS Research Instruments is carried out followed by a checklist of CI, HI, BI data. RESULTS: The results of research on larvae monitoring in Darul Imarah sub-district, it is known that of the 120 houses that were inspected for larvae, 74 houses were cheerful 46 houses were negative for larvae. The number of containers inspected from 120 houses was 502, with the results that 309 houses were found to be larvae and 193 houses were not found. The HI value obtained was 62%, the CI value was 61%, the BI value was 103%, the larva-free number value obtained was 38.3%. Based on these results, it is known that the density figure level is at the larva density level, which is included in the high-density category. In 2018, there were 16 cases of DHF in Darul Imarah District; in 2019, it increased to 60 cases, and in 2020 to 13 cases. The results of buffer analysis in the zone 50 m from the dengue case sufferer’s house showed that mosquitoes originating from the house of the dengue case sufferers were a risk factor that resulted in the transmission of dengue. CONCLUSION: From the survey results, it is known that the density figure is in the high larva density category. The smartphone method is better used for larva density surveys by cadres than manual. Regular larva monitoring will increase this alert system to anticipate cases.

Characterizing dengue transmission in rural areas: A systematic review

“…For all studies included in our qualitative synthesis, we evaluated the rural definitions and study site descriptions used by the authors ( Table 1 ). One-third of the articles did not provide justification for classifying their study site as rural (34.9%, n = 37) [ 4 , 5 , 40 – 42 , 47 , 49 , 52 , 56 , 65 – 67 , 72 , 75 , 77 , 78 , 87 , 89 – 93 , 95 – 97 , 107 , 110 , 111 , 113 , 118 , 120 , 121 , 124 , 125 , 127 , 129 , 130 , 132 ]. The remaining 69 studies provided a wide variety of rural definitions.…”

“…We identified 59 articles (n) with 205 estimates (a) estimating dengue in rural areas [ 4 – 9 , 25 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 57 – 59 , 61 – 65 , 68 – 70 , 73 – 77 , 81 , 82 , 84 , 89 , 91 – 94 , 97 – 100 , 102 – 104 , 106 , 108 , 109 , 113 , 116 , 119 , 121 , 126 , 130 – 132 , 135 ]. These estimates were further categorized into measurements of seroprevalence ( n = 18, a = 37) [ 25 , 43 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 57 – 59 , 62 , 65 , 68 , 69 , 75 , 81 , 91 , 93 ...…”

“…Most of these were community-based studies that included active case finding rather than passive surveillance. The average follow-up time for active surveillance studies was 381.2 days [ 5 – 7 , 62 , 65 , 69 , 70 , 73 , 78 , 99 , 100 , 109 , 126 , 130 – 132 ] compared to the average follow-up time of 1,118.7 days for passive surveillance studies [ 4 , 8 , 9 , 41 , 48 , 61 , 76 , 77 , 89 , 92 , 102 , 108 , 113 , 116 , 121 , 135 ]. Estimates collected from passive methods (i.e., hospital referrals) reported lower incidence rates than studies that used more active case finding (i.e., cohort, community surveillance).…”

“…that presented rural-urban comparison estimates (n = 37) [4][5][6][7]9,25,39,[42][43][44]49,53,[59][60][61][62]65,69,72,75,78,83,85,86,88,93,[95][96][97]101,109,119,120,125,126,133,135] and (2) articles that presented rural estimates (n = 92) [4][5][6][7][8][9]19,25,[73][74][75][76][77][78][80][81]…”

Improving Community Knowledge and Behavior in the One House One Jumantik Program in Dengue Control

“…The health cadres come from the community themselves. So more effective in increasing public awareness(K. Kartini et al, 2021). A jumantik coordinator is a vital element in the success of the G1R1J program.…”