4.3 Article

Determinants of bednet ownership and use in visceral leishmaniasis-endemic areas of the Indian subcontinent

期刊

TROPICAL MEDICINE & INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 60-67

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2009.02433.x

关键词

visceral leishmaniasis; India; Nepal; bednet use; bednet ownership; poverty

资金

  1. European Union [015374]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE To document ownership and use of bednets with its determinants in the visceral leishmaniasis (VL)-endemic region where mainly non-insecticide impregnated nets are available through commercial channels, and bednets are being considered as a leishmaniasis vector control measure. METHODS In August-September 2006, semi-structured household (HH) questionnaires and observation guides were used in a random sample of 1330 HHs in VL-endemic districts of India and Nepal to collect data on VL knowledge, HH socio-economic status, bednet ownership and use patterns. An asset index was constructed to allow wealth ranking of the HH. A binary logistic response General Estimating Equations model was fitted to evaluate the determinants of bednet ownership and use. RESULTS The proportion of HHs with at least one bednet purchased on the commercial market was 81.5% in India and 70.2% in Nepal. The bednets were used in all seasons by 50.6% and 54.1% of the Indian and Nepalese HH owning a bed net. There was striking inequity in bednet ownership: only 38.3% of the poorest quintile in Nepal owned at least one net, compared to 89.7% of the wealthiest quintile. In India, the same trend was observed though somewhat less pronounced (73.6% vs. 93.7%). Multivariate analysis showed that poverty was an important independent predictor for not having a bednet in the HH [OR 5.39 (2.90-10.03)]. CONCLUSION Given the inequity in commercial bednet ownership, free distribution of insecticide-treated bednets to the general population seems imperative to achieve a mass effect on vector density.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据