Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
Foundation of Public Utility

Safety of a topical insect repellent (picaridin) during community mass use for malaria control in rural Cambodia

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Heng, S. en_US
dc.contributor.author Sluydts, V. en_US
dc.contributor.author Durnez, L. en_US
dc.contributor.author Mean, V. en_US
dc.contributor.author Polo, K. en_US
dc.contributor.author Tho, S. en_US
dc.contributor.author Coosemans, M. en_US
dc.contributor.author Van Griensven, J. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2017-12-18T12:55:42Z
dc.date.available 2017-12-18T12:55:42Z
dc.date.issued 2017 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1932-6203 en_US
dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172566 en_US
dc.identifier.other http://lib.itg.be/pdf/itg/2017/2017ponee0172566.pdf en_US
dc.identifier.other 16 pp. en_US
dc.identifier.other ITG-B1B; ITG-B2A; ITG-B3A; ITG-B7; ITG-CLA; MULTI; DBM; U-ENTOM; DCS; U-HIVNTD; JIF; DOI; PDF; PMC; OAJ; E-only; Abstract; DSPACE64 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10390/9531
dc.description.abstract BACKGROUND: While community distribution of topical repellents has been proposed as an additional malaria control intervention, the safety of this intervention at the population level remains poorly evaluated. We describe the safety of mass distribution of the picaridin repellent during a cluster-randomised trial in rural Cambodia in 2012-2013. METHODS: The repellent was distributed among 57 intervention villages with around 25,000 inhabitants by a team of village distributors. Information on individual adverse events, reported by phone by the village distributors, was obtained through home visits. Information on perceived side effects, reported at the family level, was obtained during two-weekly bottle exchange. Adverse events were classified as adverse reactions (events likely linked to the repellent), cases of repellent abuse and events not related to the repellent use, and classified as per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. FINDINGS: Of the 41 adverse events notified by phone by the village distributors, there were 22 adverse reactions, 11 cases of repellent abuse (6 accidental, 5 suicide attempts) and 8 non-related events. All adverse reactions were mild, occurred in the first few months of use, and mainly manifested as skin conditions. Of the 11 cases of abuse, 2 were moderate and 2 life-threatening. All cases with adverse reactions and repellent abuse recovered completely. 20% of families reported perceived side effects, mainly itching, headache, dizziness and bad smell, but few discontinued repellent use. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse reactions and abuse during mass use of picaridin were uncommon and generally mild, supporting the safety of the picaridin repellent for malaria control. en_US
dc.language English en_US
dc.relation.uri http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28339462 en_US
dc.subject Malaria en_US
dc.subject Protozoal diseases en_US
dc.subject Control en_US
dc.subject Vector control en_US
dc.subject Insect repellent en_US
dc.subject Picaridin en_US
dc.subject Safety en_US
dc.subject Rural en_US
dc.subject Cambodia en_US
dc.subject Asia-Southeast en_US
dc.title Safety of a topical insect repellent (picaridin) during community mass use for malaria control in rural Cambodia en_US
dc.type Article-E en_US
dc.citation.issue 3 en_US
dc.citation.jtitle PLoS ONE en_US
dc.citation.volume 12 en_US
dc.citation.pages e0172566 en_US
dc.citation.abbreviation PLoS ONE en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record