Scaling Up of an Innovative Intervention to Reduce Risk of Dengue, Chikungunya, and Zika Transmission in Uruguay in the Framework of an Intersectoral Approach with and without Community Participation

Abstract

Abstract.To contribute to the prevention of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika, a process of scaling up an innovative intervention to reduce Aedes aegypti habitats, was carried out in the city of Salto (Uruguay) based on a transdisciplinary analysis of the eco-bio-social determinants. The intervention in one-third of the city included the distributions of plastic bags for all households to collect all discarded water containers that were recollected by the Ministry of Health and the Municipality vector control services. The results were evaluated in 20 randomly assigned clusters of 100 households each, in the intervention and control arm. The intervention resulted in a significantly larger decrease in the number of pupae per person index (as a proxy for adult vector abundance) than the corresponding decrease in the control areas (both areas decreased by winter effects). The reduction of intervention costs (“incremental costs”) in relation to routine vector control activities was 46%. Community participation increased the collaboration with the intervention program considerably (from 48% of bags handed back out of the total of bags delivered to 59% of bags handed back). Although the costs increased by 26% compared with intervention without community participation, the acceptability of actions by residents increased from 66% to 78%.

Community engagement for COVID-19 prevention and control: a rapid evidence synthesis

“…Five community engagement initiatives were used for Zika within the USA and Puerto Rico (n=3), and one each in Singapore and Uruguay. [44][45][46][47] Four articles were specific to H1N1, with three from Australia and one from Canada. 35-37 48 No articles were found that detailed community engagement for SARS or MERS.…”

Community participation and community engagement in the response to the Zika-Virus-Outbreak in Latin America 2015-2019 - A Scoping Review

“…Of the 46 included documents, 45 were published in English and one in Spanish. Of the peer-reviewed documents there was heterogeneity in study designs (based on MMAT classification), which included twenty qualitative studies [8, 21-24, 26, 29, 32, 35, 36, 38, 47-54, 56] , nine cross-sectional mixed method studies [27, 30, 31, 37, 57-61] , one cluster randomised controlled trial [62] , four descriptive studies [63-66] two reviews [67, 68] , three surveys [34, 69, 70] , one cohort study [33] , one pre-post design study [71] , and, four opinion and commentary essays [28, 72-74] . The majority of the studies was performed in Brazil (n=10) and in Puerto Rico (n=6), moreover in Mexico (n=5) Colombia (n= 4), Peru (n=4), Dominican Republic (n=3), Guatemala (n=2), Honduras (n=2), Ecuador (n=2), Cuba (n=2), Nicaragua (n=1), French Guyana (n=1), Uruguay (n=2), Belize (n=1), Curacao (n=1) and Argentina (n=1).…”

Community engagement for COVID-19 prevention and control: A Rapid Evidence Synthesis

“…The remaining three Ebola examples [37-39] were related to the 2018-2020 outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, two of which focused on efforts in Uganda. Five community engagement initiatives were used for Zika within the United States and Puerto Rico (n=3), and one each in Singapore and Uruguay [40-43]. Four articles were specific to in H1N1, with three from Australia and one from Canada [31-33, 44].…”