1
|
Msellemu D, Tanner M, Yadav R, Moore SJ. Occupational exposure to malaria, leishmaniasis and arbovirus vectors in endemic regions: A systematic review. CURRENT RESEARCH IN PARASITOLOGY & VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES 2024; 6:100185. [PMID: 39027087 PMCID: PMC11252614 DOI: 10.1016/j.crpvbd.2024.100185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2024] [Revised: 04/26/2024] [Accepted: 06/01/2024] [Indexed: 07/20/2024]
Abstract
Vector-borne diseases, including dengue, leishmaniasis and malaria, may be more common among individuals whose occupations or behaviours bring them into frequent contact with these disease vectors outside of their homes. A systematic review was conducted to ascertain at-risk occupations and situations that put individuals at increased risk of exposure to these disease vectors in endemic regions and identify the most suitable interventions for each exposure. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines on articles published between 1945 and October 2021, searched in 16 online databases. The primary outcome was incidence or prevalence of dengue, leishmaniasis or malaria. The review excluded ecological and qualitative studies, abstracts only, letters, commentaries, reviews, and studies of laboratory-acquired infections. Studies were appraised, data extracted, and a descriptive analysis conducted. Bite interventions for each risk group were assessed. A total of 1170 articles were screened and 99 included. Malaria, leishmaniasis and dengue were presented in 47, 41 and 24 articles, respectively; some articles presented multiple conditions. The most represented populations were soldiers, 38% (43 of 112 studies); refugees and travellers, 15% (17) each; migrant workers, 12.5% (14); miners, 9% (10); farmers, 5% (6); rubber tappers and missionaries, 1.8% (2) each; and forest workers, 0.9% (1). Risk of exposure was categorised into round-the-clock or specific times of day/night dependent on occupation. Exposure to these vectors presents a critical and understudied concern for outdoor workers and mobile populations. When devising interventions to provide round-the-clock vector bite protection, two populations are considered. First, mobile populations, characterized by their high mobility, may find potential benefits in insecticide-treated clothing, though more research and optimization are essential. Treated clothing offers personal vector protection and holds promise for economically disadvantaged individuals, especially when enabling them to self-treat their clothing to repel vectors. Secondly, semi-permanent and permanent settlement populations can receive a combination of interventions that offer both personal and community protection, including spatial repellents, suitable for extended stays. Existing research is heavily biased towards tourism and the military, diverting attention and resources from vulnerable populations where these interventions are most required like refugee populations as well as those residing in sub-Saharan Africa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Msellemu
- Vector Control Product Testing Unit, Environmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Tanzania
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Kreuzstrasse 2, 4123, Allschwil, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Marcel Tanner
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Kreuzstrasse 2, 4123, Allschwil, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Rajpal Yadav
- Department of Control of Neglected Tropical Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
- Academy of Public Health Entomology, Udaipur, 313 002, India
| | - Sarah J. Moore
- Vector Control Product Testing Unit, Environmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Tanzania
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Kreuzstrasse 2, 4123, Allschwil, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland
- The Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology (NM-AIST), P.O. Box 447, Tengeru, Arusha, Tanzania
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sánchez-González L, Adams LE, Saavedra R, Little EM, Medina NA, Major CG, Bruck M, Miranda J, Rosado-Santiago C, Ryff K, Ortiz M, Brown G, Barrera R, Pérez-Guerra CL, Rivera-Amill V, Paz-Bailey G. Assessment of community support for Wolbachia-mediated population suppression as a control method for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in a community cohort in Puerto Rico. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2021; 15:e0009966. [PMID: 34871301 PMCID: PMC8675917 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 11/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Arboviral diseases transmitted by Aedes species mosquitoes pose an increasing public health challenge in tropical regions. Wolbachia-mediated population suppression (Wolbachia suppression) is a vector control method used to reduce Aedes mosquito populations by introducing male mosquitoes infected with Wolbachia, a naturally occurring endosymbiotic bacterium. When Wolbachia-infected male mosquitoes mate with female wild mosquitoes, the resulting eggs will not hatch. Public support is vital to the successful implementation and sustainability of vector control interventions. Communities Organized to Prevent Arboviruses (COPA) is a cohort study to determine the incidence of arboviral disease in Ponce, Puerto Rico and evaluate vector control methods. Focus groups were conducted with residents of COPA communities to gather their opinion on vector control methods; during 2018–2019, adult COPA participants were interviewed regarding their views on Wolbachia suppression; and a follow-up questionnaire was conducted among a subset of participants and non-participants residing in COPA communities. We analyzed factors associated with support for this method. Among 1,528 participants in the baseline survey, median age was 37 years and 63% were female. A total of 1,032 (68%) respondents supported Wolbachia suppression. Respondents with an income of $40,000 or more were 1.34 times as likely [95% CI: 1.03, 1.37] to support Wolbachia suppression than those who earned less than $40,000 annually. Respondents who reported repellant use were 1.19 times as likely to support Wolbachia suppression [95% CI: 1.03, 1.37]. A follow-up survey in 2020 showed that most COPA participants (86%) and non-participants living in COPA communities (84%) supported Wolbachia suppression during and after an educational campaign. The most frequent questions regarding this method were related to its impact on human and animal health, and the environment. Continuous community engagement and education efforts before and during the implementation of novel vector control interventions are necessary to increase and maintain community support. Vector control is key to decrease the incidence of viral infections transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes, like dengue, but traditional control methods like insecticides and breeding sites reduction can be time-consuming, ineffective, and challenged by insecticide resistance. In the method known as Wolbachia suppression, male mosquitoes infected with the bacterium Wolbachia are released to mate with wild female mosquitoes. As the resulting eggs do not hatch, the mosquito population decreases over time. As public support is key to implement and maintain any vector control method, we assessed community support for Wolbachia suppression through focus groups and interviews with residents of Ponce, Puerto Rico, where a community cohort has been implemented. Support for this method in this population was high and increased after an educational campaign. Respondents with higher income and those who used repellent in the last 30 days were more likely to support Wolbachia suppression. Questions regarding the impact of this method on human and animal health, and the environment, were the most reported. Community engagement activities to increase the understanding of the method, including clear and specific information on health risk assessments, should be conducted before and during the implementation of Wolbachia suppression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Laura E. Adams
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | | | - Emma M. Little
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | - Nicole A. Medina
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | - Chelsea G. Major
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | - Marina Bruck
- Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America
| | | | | | - Kyle Ryff
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | | | - Grayson Brown
- Puerto Rico Vector Control Unit, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | - Roberto Barrera
- CDC Division of Vector Borne Diseases, Dengue Branch, San Juan, Puerto Rico
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|