Journal of Mosquito Research, 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-20 http://emtoscipublisher.com/index.php/jmr 11 In term of risk, at house level, ITPS ZV alone appeared a promising efficient tool with its longer, and higher, efficacy, compared to LLINs alone. Comparing the reduction of risks by ITPS ZV alone (Table 3b) versus combination LLIN + ZF (Table 2b) it appeared (Table 3c) that the protection was better and longer with ITPS ZV alone than adding nets and wall lining (Graph 3d). Table 3c Increasing protection with time conferred by ITPS ZV alone versus combination LLIN+ ITPS ZF (diff= difference) Months Diff. M1 4.6% M2 12.3% M3 18.5% M4 24.7% M5 30.8% M6 36.4% M7 41.7% M8 46.1% M9 50.6% M10 54.3% M11 57.6% M12 61.0% Graph 3d Evolution, with time, of the reduction of risks comparing ITPS alone versus association LLIN+ ITPS 3.4 Evolution of risk before and after IRS then ITPS With two rounds of inside house spraying with lambdacyhalothrin, then installation of ITPS (deltamethrin), the number of main vectors per trap decreased from 0.50 to 0.13 and the sporozoite index dropped from 7.14% to 5.26%. With these data in the Birley’s formula it is possible to calculate the risk of receiving an infective bite in sleeping one day, one week, one month (Graph 4a and 4b), one year (Graph 4c) in house before and after IRS then ITPS.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==