IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003248.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative functional survival and equivalent annual cost of 3 long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) products in Tanzania: A randomised trial with 3-year follow up

Author

Listed:
  • Lena M Lorenz
  • John Bradley
  • Joshua Yukich
  • Dennis J Massue
  • Zawadi Mageni Mboma
  • Olivier Pigeon
  • Jason Moore
  • Albert Kilian
  • Jo Lines
  • William Kisinza
  • Hans J Overgaard
  • Sarah J Moore

Abstract

Background: Two billion long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) have been procured for malaria control. A functional LLIN is one that is present, is in good physical condition, and remains insecticidal, thereby providing protection against vector-borne diseases through preventing bites and killing disease vectors. The World Health Organization (WHO) prequalifies LLINs that remain adequately insecticidal 3 years after deployment. Therefore, institutional buyers often assume that prequalified LLINs are functionally identical with a 3-year lifespan. We measured the lifespans of 3 LLIN products, and calculated their cost per year of functional life, to demonstrate the economic and public health importance of procuring the most cost-effective LLIN product based on its lifespan. Methods and findings: A randomised double-blinded trial of 3 pyrethroid LLIN products (10,571 nets in total) was conducted at 3 follow-up points: 10 months (August–October 2014), 22 months (August–October 2015), and 36 months (October–December 2016) among 3,393 households in Tanzania using WHO-recommended methods. Primary outcome was LLIN functional survival (LLIN present and in serviceable condition). Secondary outcomes were (1) bioefficacy and chemical content (residual insecticidal activity) and (2) protective efficacy for volunteers sleeping under the LLINs (bite reduction and mosquitoes killed). Median LLIN functional survival was significantly different between the 3 net products (p = 0.001): 2.0 years (95% CI 1.7–2.3) for Olyset, 2.5 years (95% CI 2.2–2.8) for PermaNet 2.0 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73 [95% CI 0.64–0.85], p = 0.001), and 2.6 years (95% CI 2.3–2.8) for NetProtect (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.62–0.77], p

Suggested Citation

  • Lena M Lorenz & John Bradley & Joshua Yukich & Dennis J Massue & Zawadi Mageni Mboma & Olivier Pigeon & Jason Moore & Albert Kilian & Jo Lines & William Kisinza & Hans J Overgaard & Sarah J Moore, 2020. "Comparative functional survival and equivalent annual cost of 3 long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) products in Tanzania: A randomised trial with 3-year follow up," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-18, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003248
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003248
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003248&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003248?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. H. Juliette T. Unwin & Ellie Sherrard-Smith & Thomas S. Churcher & Azra C. Ghani, 2023. "Quantifying the direct and indirect protection provided by insecticide treated bed nets against malaria," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003248. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.