English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  Insecticide-treated net (ITN) durability, measured through physical integrity and bioefficacy, must be accurately assessed in order to plan the timely replacement of worn out nets and guide procurement of longer-lasting, cost-effective nets. World Health Organization (WHO) guidance advises that new intervention class ITNs be assessed 3 years after distribution, in experimental huts. In order to obtain information on whole-net efficacy cost-effectively and with adequate replication, a new bioassay, the Ifakara Ambient Chamber Test (I-ACT), a semi-field whole net assay baited with human host, was compared to established WHO durability testing methods.    Methods  Two experiments were conducted using pyrethroid-susceptible female adult  Anopheles gambiae  sensu stricto comparing bioefficacy of Olyset ® , PermaNet ®  2.0 and NetProtect ®  evaluated by I-ACT and WHO cone and tunnel tests. In total, 432 nets (144/brand) were evaluated using I-ACT and cone test. Olyset ®  nets (132/144) that did not meet the WHO cone test threshold criteria (≥ 80% mortality or ≥ 95% knockdown) were evaluated using tunnel tests with threshold criteria of ≥ 80% mortality or ≥ 90% feeding inhibition for WHO tunnel and I-ACT. Pass rate of nets tested by WHO combined standard WHO bioassays (cone/tunnel tests) was compared to pass in I-ACT only by net brand and time after distribution.    Results  Overall, more nets passed WHO threshold criteria when tested with I-ACT than with standard WHO bioassays 92% vs 69%, (OR: 4.1, 95% CI 3.5–4.7, p < 0.0001). The proportion of Olyset ®  nets that passed differed if WHO 2005 or WHO 2013 LN testing guidelines were followed: 77% vs 71%, respectively. Based on I-ACT results, PermaNet ®  2.0 and NetProtect ®  demonstrated superior mortality and non-inferior feeding inhibition to Olyset ®  over 3 years of field use in Tanzania.    Conclusion  Ifakara Ambient Chamber Test may have use for durability studies and non-inferiority testing of new ITN products. It measures composite bioefficacy and physical integrity with both mortality and feeding inhibition endpoints, using fewer mosquitoes than standard WHO bioassays (cone and tunnel tests). The I-ACT is a high-throughput assay to evaluate ITN products that work through either contact toxicity or feeding inhibition. I-ACT allows mosquitoes to interact with a host sleeping underneath a net as encountered in the field, without risk to human participants.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (10.1186/s12936-019-2741-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparing the new Ifakara Ambient Chamber Test with WHO cone and tunnel tests for bioefficacy and non-inferiority testing of insecticide-treated nets