-
Malaria Journal Oct 2023Malaria and dengue fever are the leading causes of acute, undifferentiated febrile illness. In Africa, misdiagnosis of dengue fever as malaria is a common scenario.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Malaria and dengue fever are the leading causes of acute, undifferentiated febrile illness. In Africa, misdiagnosis of dengue fever as malaria is a common scenario. Through a systematic review of the published literature, this study seeks to estimate the prevalence of dengue and malaria coinfection among acute undifferentiated febrile diseases in Africa.
METHODS
Relevant publications were systematically searched in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar until May 19, 2023. A random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to summarize and examine the prevalence estimates.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies with 22,803 acute undifferentiated febrile patients from 10 countries in Africa were included. The meta-analysis findings revealed a pooled prevalence of malaria and dengue coinfection of 4.2%, with Central Africa having the highest rate (4.7%), followed by East Africa (2.7%) and West Africa (1.6%). Continent-wide, Plasmodium falciparum and acute dengue virus coinfection prevalence increased significantly from 0.9% during 2008-2013 to 3.8% during 2014-2017 and to 5.5% during 2018-2021 (p = 0.0414).
CONCLUSION
There was a high and increasing prevalence of malaria and acute dengue virus coinfection in Africa. Healthcare workers should bear in mind the possibility of dengue infection as a differential diagnosis for acute febrile illness, as well as the possibility of coexisting malaria and dengue in endemic areas. In addition, high-quality multicentre studies are required to verify the above conclusions. Protocol registration number: CRD42022311301.
Topics: Humans; Dengue Virus; Coinfection; Dengue; Cross-Sectional Studies; Prevalence; Malaria; Africa; Fever
PubMed: 37803381
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-023-04723-y -
Scientific Reports Sep 2023Reduced glutathione (GSH) is a crucial antioxidant with recognized roles in malaria pathogenesis and host response. Despite its importance, reports on the association of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Reduced glutathione (GSH) is a crucial antioxidant with recognized roles in malaria pathogenesis and host response. Despite its importance, reports on the association of GSH with malaria are inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the differences in GSH levels in relation to Plasmodium infection. A comprehensive literature search of six electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest) was conducted. Of the 2158 initially identified records, 18 met the eligibility criteria. The majority of studies reported a significant decrease in GSH levels in malaria patients compared with uninfected controls, and this was confirmed by meta-analysis (P < 0.01, Hedges g: - 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.48 to - 0.46, I: 99.12%, 17 studies). Additionally, there was no significant difference in GSH levels between Plasmodium falciparum malaria and P. vivax malaria (P = 0.80, Hedges g: 0.11, 95% CI - 0.76 to 0.98, I: 93.23%, three studies). Similarly, no significant variation was observed between symptomatic and asymptomatic malaria cases (P = 0.78, Hedges g: 0.06, 95% CI - 0.34 to 0.46, I: 48.07%, two studies). In conclusion, although GSH levels appear to be generally lower in malaria patients, further detailed studies are necessary to fully elucidate this complex relationship.
Topics: Humans; Malaria, Vivax; Plasmodium falciparum; Glutathione; Plasmodium vivax; Malaria, Falciparum; Malaria
PubMed: 37777547
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43583-z -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Feb 2024Primaquine radical cure is used to treat dormant liver-stage parasites and prevent relapsing Plasmodium vivax malaria but is limited by concerns of haemolysis. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Primaquine radical cure is used to treat dormant liver-stage parasites and prevent relapsing Plasmodium vivax malaria but is limited by concerns of haemolysis. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the haematological safety of different primaquine regimens for P vivax radical cure.
METHODS
For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central for prospective clinical studies of uncomplicated P vivax from endemic countries published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 8, 2023. We included studies if they had active follow-up of at least 28 days, if they included a treatment group with daily primaquine given over multiple days where primaquine was commenced within 3 days of schizontocidal treatment and was given alone or coadministered with chloroquine or one of four artemisinin-based combination therapies (ie, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine), and if they recorded haemoglobin or haematocrit concentrations on day 0. We excluded studies if they were on prevention, prophylaxis, or patients with severe malaria, or if data were extracted retrospectively from medical records outside of a planned trial. For the meta-analysis, we contacted the investigators of eligible trials to request individual patient data and we then pooled data that were made available by Aug 23, 2021. The main outcome was haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL by day 14. Haemoglobin concentration changes between day 0 and days 2-3 and between day 0 and days 5-7 were assessed by mixed-effects linear regression for patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity of (1) 30% or higher and (2) between 30% and less than 70%. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019154470 and CRD42022303680.
FINDINGS
Of 226 identified studies, 18 studies with patient-level data from 5462 patients from 15 countries were included in the analysis. A haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL occurred in one (0·1%) of 1208 patients treated without primaquine, none of 893 patients treated with a low daily dose of primaquine (<0·375 mg/kg per day), five (0·3%) of 1464 patients treated with an intermediate daily dose (0·375 mg/kg per day to <0·75 mg/kg per day), and six (0·5%) of 1269 patients treated with a high daily dose (≥0·75 mg/kg per day). The covariate-adjusted mean estimated haemoglobin changes at days 2-3 were -0·6 g/dL (95% CI -0·7 to -0·5), -0·7 g/dL (-0·8 to -0·5), -0·6 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), and -0·5 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), respectively. In 51 patients with G6PD activity between 30% and less than 70%, the adjusted mean haemoglobin concentration on days 2-3 decreased as G6PD activity decreased; two patients in this group who were treated with a high daily dose of primaquine had a reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL. 17 of 18 included studies had a low or unclear risk of bias.
INTERPRETATION
Treatment of patients with G6PD activity of 30% or higher with 0·25-0·5 mg/kg per day primaquine regimens and patients with G6PD activity of 70% or higher with 0·25-1 mg/kg per day regimens were associated with similar risks of haemolysis to those in patients treated without primaquine, supporting the safe use of primaquine radical cure at these doses.
FUNDING
Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Medicines for Malaria Venture.
Topics: Humans; Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artesunate; Australia; Hemoglobins; Hemolysis; Malaria, Vivax; Plasmodium vivax; Primaquine; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37748497
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00431-0 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Feb 2024Primaquine is used to eliminate Plasmodium vivax hypnozoites, but its optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Primaquine is used to eliminate Plasmodium vivax hypnozoites, but its optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of different primaquine dosing regimens to prevent P vivax recurrence.
METHODS
For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central for prospective clinical studies of uncomplicated P vivax from endemic countries published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 8, 2023. We included studies if they had active follow-up of at least 28 days, and if they included a treatment group with daily primaquine given over multiple days, where primaquine was commenced within 7 days of schizontocidal treatment and was given alone or coadministered with chloroquine or one of four artemisinin-based combination therapies (ie, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine). We excluded studies if they were on prevention, prophylaxis, or patients with severe malaria, or if data were extracted retrospectively from medical records outside of a planned trial. For the meta-analysis, we contacted the investigators of eligible trials to request individual patient data and we then pooled data that were made available by Aug 23, 2021. We assessed the effects of total dose and duration of primaquine regimens on the rate of first P vivax recurrence between day 7 and day 180 by Cox's proportional hazards regression (efficacy analysis). The effect of primaquine daily dose on gastrointestinal symptoms on days 5-7 was assessed by modified Poisson regression (tolerability analysis). The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019154470.
FINDINGS
Of 226 identified studies, 23 studies with patient-level data from 6879 patients from 16 countries were included in the efficacy analysis. At day 180, the risk of recurrence was 51·0% (95% CI 48·2-53·9) in 1470 patients treated without primaquine, 19·3% (16·9-21·9) in 2569 patients treated with a low total dose of primaquine (approximately 3·5 mg/kg), and 8·1% (7·0-9·4) in 2811 patients treated with a high total dose of primaquine (approximately 7 mg/kg), regardless of primaquine treatment duration. Compared with treatment without primaquine, the rate of P vivax recurrence was lower after treatment with low-dose primaquine (adjusted hazard ratio 0·21, 95% CI 0·17-0·27; p<0·0001) and high-dose primaquine (0·10, 0·08-0·12; p<0·0001). High-dose primaquine had greater efficacy than low-dose primaquine in regions with high and low relapse periodicity (ie, the time from initial infection to vivax relapse). 16 studies with patient-level data from 5609 patients from ten countries were included in the tolerability analysis. Gastrointestinal symptoms on days 5-7 were reported by 4·0% (95% CI 0·0-8·7) of 893 patients treated without primaquine, 6·2% (0·5-12·0) of 737 patients treated with a low daily dose of primaquine (approximately 0·25 mg/kg per day), 5·9% (1·8-10·1) of 1123 patients treated with an intermediate daily dose (approximately 0·5 mg/kg per day) and 10·9% (5·7-16·1) of 1178 patients treated with a high daily dose (approximately 1 mg/kg per day). 20 of 23 studies included in the efficacy analysis and 15 of 16 in the tolerability analysis had a low or unclear risk of bias.
INTERPRETATION
Increasing the total dose of primaquine from 3·5 mg/kg to 7 mg/kg can reduce P vivax recurrences by more than 50% in most endemic regions, with a small associated increase in gastrointestinal symptoms.
FUNDING
Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Medicines for Malaria Venture.
Topics: Humans; Antimalarials; Artemether; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artesunate; Malaria; Malaria, Vivax; Plasmodium vivax; Primaquine; Prospective Studies; Recurrence; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37748496
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00430-9 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Dec 2023Asymptomatic malaria infections are highly prevalent in endemic areas. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Asymptomatic malaria infections are highly prevalent in endemic areas.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of malaria parasites in migrants screened in non-endemic areas.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE-Ovid, EMBASE, Web of Science, Global Health, Lilacs, Cochrane, and MedRxiv.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Cross-sectional studies and observational prospective or retrospective cohort studies conducted in Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand regardless of language or publication status. Studies should include prevalence data on malaria in migrants that were recruited through a systematic screening approach. We excluded studies where people were tested because of malaria symptoms.
PARTICIPANTS
Migrant individuals exposed to malaria infection ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: A standardized and validated appraisal instrument was used for studies reporting prevalence data (Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis).
METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS
Pooled estimates of the parasite prevalence by PCR, microscopy, and rapid diagnostic test (RDT) were calculated with a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was explored by stratification by age, region of origin, period of study, and quality of studies.
RESULTS
Of 1819 studies retrieved, 23 studies were included with in total 4203 participant PCR data, 3186 microscopy and 4698 RDT data, respectively. Migrants from sub-Saharan Africa had a malaria parasite prevalence of 8.3% (95% CI 5.1-12.2) by PCR, 4.3% (1.5-8.2) by RDT, and 3.1% (0.7-6.8) by microscopy. For migrants from Asia and Latin America, the prevalence with PCR was 0% (0.0-0.08) and 0.4% (0.0-1.8), respectively. Migrants from the Central African Region had the highest PCR prevalence (9.3% [6.0-13.0]), followed by West African migrants (2.0% [0.0-7.7]). Restricting the analysis to sub-Saharan Africa migrants arriving to the host country within the previous year, the PCR-based prevalence was 11.6% (6.9-17.4).
CONCLUSION
We provide estimates on the malaria parasite prevalence in migrants in non-endemic setting. Despite heterogeneity between settings, these findings can contribute to inform screening strategies and guidelines targeting malaria in migrants.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Parasites; Prevalence; Transients and Migrants; Cross-Sectional Studies; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Malaria; Asymptomatic Infections
PubMed: 37739263
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2023.09.010 -
Scientific Reports Sep 2023Elevated uric acid (UA) levels have been reported in malaria patients and are particularly prominent in severe malaria cases. This study aims to synthesize the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Elevated uric acid (UA) levels have been reported in malaria patients and are particularly prominent in severe malaria cases. This study aims to synthesize the difference in UA levels between malaria patients and uninfected controls, and between patients with severe and non-severe malaria. A comprehensive literature search was carried out across databases such as Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies for inclusion. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated independently by two reviewers using the JBI critical appraisal tool for observational studies. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled effect sizes, expressed as Hedges' g, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The Hedges' g was pooled using the random-effects model. An initial search yielding a total of 1122 articles, and a final total of 19 studies being included in the review. Elevated UA levels were observed more prominently in malaria patients, especially those with severe manifestations, when compared to uninfected controls. The conducted meta-analysis demonstrated a significant elevation in UA levels in patients suffering from malaria as compared to uninfected controls (P < 0.01, Hedges's g = 1.40, 95% CI 0.84-1.95, I = 95.81, 16 studies). The conducted meta-analysis demonstrated a significant elevation in UA levels in patients suffering from severe malaria as compared to non-severe malaria (P < 0.01, Hedges's g = 3.45, 95% CI 1.06-5.83, I = 98.73, 6 studies). In summary, these findings provide valuable insights into the potential use of UA as a biomarker for malaria infection and determination of its severity. Further research is needed to validate these findings and to explore the underlying mechanisms that contribute to the elevation of UA levels during malaria infection.
Topics: Humans; Databases, Factual; Malaria; MEDLINE; Uric Acid
PubMed: 37697061
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-42217-8 -
Scientific Reports Sep 2023Inconsistent catalase (CAT) research necessitates a comprehensive review of CAT levels among patients with malaria to achieve better therapeutic strategies. This study... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Inconsistent catalase (CAT) research necessitates a comprehensive review of CAT levels among patients with malaria to achieve better therapeutic strategies. This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze available literature on CAT levels in nonpregnant and pregnant individuals with malaria compared with those in uninfected controls, with the goal of providing a robust evidence base for future research and potential interventions. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search across six databases was conducted to examine CAT levels in patients with malaria. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers, and study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist. The standardized mean difference of CAT levels was calculated with heterogeneity assessment. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore heterogeneity and assess the robustness of the findings. Publication bias was visually and statistically assessed and corrected, if necessary. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata software, with a significance level set at P < 0.05. Nineteen studies were included in the review. These studies, published from before 2000 to 2023, primarily from Africa and Asia, focused on different Plasmodium species and age groups. Results of qualitative synthesis among nonpregnant individuals consistently showed lower CAT levels in malaria-infected individuals, although some studies reported higher levels. No significant differences in CAT levels were found between malaria-infected and uninfected individuals, as demonstrated by a meta-analysis overall (P = 0.05, Hedges' g: - 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): (- 1.56)-0.01, I: 98.47, 15 studies), but subgroup analyses showed significant differences in CAT levels in studies conducted in Africa (P = 0.02, Hedges' g: - 0.57, 95% CI: - 1.02-(0.11), I: 91.81, 7 studies), and in studies that specifically focused on children (P = 0.03, Hedges' g: - 0.57, 95% CI: - 1.07-(- 0.07), I: 87.52, 4 studies). Pregnant women showed variations in CAT levels across trimesters. This study provides valuable insights into the association between malaria infection and CAT enzyme levels, particularly in nonpregnant individuals. Furthermore, well-designed studies are essential to decoding the intricacies of this relationship, which could have significant implications for understanding disease processes and improving patient care.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Academies and Institutes; Africa; Asia; Catalase; Malaria
PubMed: 37670044
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-41659-4 -
Malaria Journal Sep 2023Global interest in malaria elimination has prompted research on active test and treat (TaT) strategies. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Global interest in malaria elimination has prompted research on active test and treat (TaT) strategies.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness of TaT strategies to reduce malaria transmission.
RESULTS
A total of 72 empirical research and 24 modelling studies were identified, mainly focused on proactive mass TaT (MTaT) and reactive case detection (RACD) in higher and lower transmission settings, respectively. Ten intervention studies compared MTaT to no MTaT and the evidence for impact on malaria incidence was weak. No intervention studies compared RACD to no RACD. Compared to passive case detection (PCD) alone, PCD + RACD using standard diagnostics increased infection detection 52.7% and 11.3% in low and very low transmission settings, respectively. Using molecular methods increased this detection of infections by 1.4- and 1.1-fold, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Results suggest MTaT is not effective for reducing transmission. By increasing case detection, surveillance data provided by RACD may indirectly reduce transmission by informing coordinated responses of intervention targeting.
Topics: Humans; Malaria
PubMed: 37661286
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-023-04670-8 -
Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) Jul 2023Several studies have evaluated the relationship between malondialdehyde (MDA) concentrations and infections; however, the findings remain inconclusive. This study... (Review)
Review
Several studies have evaluated the relationship between malondialdehyde (MDA) concentrations and infections; however, the findings remain inconclusive. This study synthesized differences in MDA concentrations among patients with different levels of clinical severity, uninfected controls, and different species. The research protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023393540). Systematic literature searches for relevant studies were performed using the Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Qualitative and quantitative syntheses (meta-analyses) of distinct MDA concentrations between the disease groups were performed. Twenty-three studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. Overall, MDA concentrations were significantly elevated in participants with malaria relative to uninfected controls ( < 0.01, Cohen d: 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.88-3.14, I: 96.22%, 14 studies). Increased MDA concentrations in participants with malaria compared with uninfected controls were found in studies that enrolled patients with malaria ( < 0.01, Cohen d: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.90-3.10, I: 89.7%, 7 studies) and malaria ( < 0.01, Cohen d: 3.70, 95% CI: 2.48-4.92, I: 90.11%, 3 studies). Our findings confirm that MDA concentrations increase during infection, indicating a rise in oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation. Thus, MDA levels can be a valuable biomarker for evaluating these processes in individuals with malaria. However, further research is necessary to fully elucidate the intricate relationship between malaria, antioxidants, oxidative stress, and the specific role of MDA in the progression of malaria.
PubMed: 37627497
DOI: 10.3390/antiox12081502 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Insecticide-based interventions, such as long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), remain the backbone of malaria vector control.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Insecticide-based interventions, such as long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), remain the backbone of malaria vector control. These interventions target mosquitoes that prefer to feed and rest indoors, but have limited capacity to prevent transmission that occurs outdoors or outside regular sleeping hours. In low-endemicity areas, malaria elimination will require that these control gaps are addressed, and complementary tools are found. The use of topical repellents may be particularly useful for populations who may not benefit from programmatic malaria control measures, such as refugees, the military, or forest goers. This Cochrane Review aims to measure the effectiveness of topical repellents to prevent malaria infection among high- and non-high-risk populations living in malaria-endemic regions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of topical repellents alone or in combination with other background interventions (long-lasting insecticide-treated nets, or indoor residual spraying, or both) for reducing the incidence of malaria in high- and non-high-risk populations living in endemic areas.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 11 January 2023: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialised Register; CENTRAL (in the Cochrane Library); MEDLINE; Embase; CAB Abstracts; and LILACS. We also searched trial registration platforms and conference proceedings; and contacted organizations and companies for ongoing and unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) of topical repellents proven to repel mosquitoes. We also included non-randomized studies that complied with pre-specified inclusion criteria: controlled before-after studies (CBA), controlled interrupted time series (ITS), and controlled cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, and extracted the data. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. A fifth review author resolved any disagreements. We analysed data by conducting a meta-analysis, stratified by whether studies included populations considered to be at high-risk of developing malaria infection (for example, refugees, forest goers, or deployed military troops). We combined results from cRCTs with RCTs by adjusting for clustering and presented results using forest plots. We used the GRADE framework to assess the certainty of the evidence. We only included data on Plasmodium falciparum infections in the meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirteen articles relating to eight trials met the inclusion criteria and were qualitatively described. We included six trials in the meta-analysis (five cRCTs and one RCT). Effect on malaria incidence Topical repellents may slightly reduce P falciparum infection and clinical incidence when both outcomes are considered together (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.98; 3 cRCTs and 1 RCT, 61,651 participants; low-certainty evidence); but not when these two outcomes were considered independently. Two cRCTs and one RCT (12,813 participants) evaluated the effect of topical repellents on infection incidence (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.02; low-certainty evidence). One cRCT (48,838 participants) evaluated their effect on clinical case incidence (IRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.36; low-certainty evidence). Three studies (2 cRCTs and 1 RCT) included participants belonging to groups considered at high-risk of being infected, while only one cRCT did not include participants at high risk. Adverse events Topical repellents are considered safe. The prevalence of adverse events among participants who used topical repellents was very low (0.6%, 283/47,515) and limited to mild skin reactions. Effect on malaria prevalence Topical repellents may slightly reduce P falciparum prevalence (odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97; 3 cRCTs and 1 RCT; 55,366 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two of these studies (1 cRCT and 1 RCT) were carried out in refugee camps, and included exclusively high-risk populations that were not receiving any other background vector control intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to conclude that topical repellents can prevent malaria in settings where other vector control interventions are in place. We found the certainty of evidence for all outcomes to be low, primarily due to the risk of bias. A protective effect was suggested among high-risk populations, specially refugees, who might not have access to other standard vector control measures. More adequately powered clinical trials carried out in refugee camps could provide further information on the potential benefit of topical repellents in this setting. Individually randomized studies are also likely necessary to understand whether topical repellents have an effect on personal protection, and the degree to which diversion to non-protected participants affects overall transmission dynamics. Despite this, the potential additional benefits of topical repellents are most likely limited in contexts where other interventions are available.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Insecticides; Mosquito Vectors; Malaria, Falciparum; Controlled Before-After Studies; Culicidae
PubMed: 37602418
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015422.pub2