Strengthening the perception-assessment tools for dengue prevention: a cross-sectional survey in a temperate region (Madeira, Portugal)

BMC Public Health

Carla Alexandra Sousa¹  Ana Clara Silva³  Gonçalo Seixas²  Luzia Gonçalves⁵  Graça Porto⁶  Rosa Teodósio⁴  Teresa Nazareth² 

[1] Unidade de Parasitologia e Microbiologia Médica, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal;Unidade de Parasitologia Médica, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal;Departamento de Saúde, Planeamento e Administração Geral, Instituto de Administração da Saúde e Assuntos Sociais, IP-RAM, Funchal, Portugal;Centro de Malária e Doenças Tropicais, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal;Centro de Estatística e Aplicações da Universidade de Lisboa (CEAUL), Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal;IBMC, Institute for Molecular and Cellular Biology, Porto, Portugal

关键词: Knowledge-attitudes-and-practices surveys;    Behavioural change models;    Domestic breeding sites;    Awareness and perception assessment;    Community perception;    Community-based participatory research;    Health education;    Community involvement;    Aedes aegypti control;    Dengue prevention;   

Others  :  1161344
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-14-39

 received in 2013-07-19, accepted in 2013-12-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Community participation is mandatory in the prevention of Dengue outbreaks. Taking public views into account is crucial to guide more effective planning and quicker community participation in preventing campaigns. This study aims to assess community perceptions of Madeira population in order to explore their involvement in the A. aegypti’s control and reinforce health-educational planning. Due to the lack of accurate methodologies for measuring perception, a new tool to assess the community’s perceptions was built.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was performed in the Island’s aegypti-infested area, exploring residents’ perceptions regarding most critical community behaviour: aegypti-source reduction and their domestic aegypti-breeding sites. A novel tool defining five essential topics which underlie the source reduction’s awareness and accession was built, herein called Essential-Perception (EP) analysis.

Results

Of 1276 individuals, 1182 completed the questionnaire (92 · 6%). EP-Score analysis revealed that community’s perceptions were scarce, inconsistent and possibly incorrect. Most of the population (99 · 6%) did not completely understood the five essential topics explored. An average of 54 · 2% of residents only partially understood each essential topic, revealing inconsistencies in their understanding. Each resident apparently believed in an average of four false assumptions/myths. Significant association (p<0.001) was found between both the EP-Score level and the domestic presence of breeding sites, supporting the validity of this EP-analysis. Aedes aegypti’s breeding sites, consisting of décor/leisure containers, presented an atypical pattern of infestation comparing with dengue prone regions.

Conclusions

The studied population was not prepared for being fully engaged in dengue prevention. Evidences suggest that EP-methodology was efficient and accurate in assessing the community perception and its compliance to practices. Moreover, it suggested a list of myths that could persist in the community. This is the first study reporting an aegypti-entomological pattern and community’s perception in a developed dengue-prone region. Tailored messages considering findings of this study are recommended to be used in future campaigns in order to more effectively impact the community perception and behaviour.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Nazareth et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Murray EAN, Quam MB, Wilder-Smith A: Epidemiology of dengue: past, present and future prospects. Clin Epidemiol 2013, 5:299-309.
• [2]Stahl H-C, Butenschön VM, Tran HT, Gozzer E, Skewes R, Mahendradhata Y, Runge-Ranzinger S, Kroeger A, Farlow A: Cost of dengue outbreaks: literature review and country case studies. BMC Public Health 2013, 13:1048.
• [3]WHO: Working to overcome the global impact of neglected tropical diseases. 2010, 6.
• [4]Jansen CC, Beebe NW: The dengue vector Aedes aegypti: what comes next. Microbes Infect 2010, 12:272-9.
• [5]Gubler DJ, Clark GG: Community-based integrated control of aedes aegypti: a brief overview of current programs. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1994, 50:50-60.
• [6]Winch P, Kendall C, Gubler D: Effectiveness of community participation in vector-borne disease control. Health Policy Plan 1992, 7:342-51.
• [7]Vanlerberghe V, Toledo ME, Rodriguez M, Gomez D, Baly A, Benitez JR, Van der Stuyft P: Community involvement in dengue vector control: cluster randomised trial. BMJ 2009, 338:b1959-b1959.
• [8]Al-Muhandis N, Hunter PR: The value of educational messages embedded in a community-based approach to combat dengue Fever: a systematic review and meta regression analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2011, 5:e1278.
• [9]dos Santos SL, Cabral ACAL: Knowledge, attitude and practice on dengue, the vector and control in an urban community of the Northeast Region, Brazil. Ciências e Saúde Coletiva 2011, 16:1319-1330.
• [10]Espinoza-Gómez F, Hernández-Suárez CMCR: Educational campaign versus malathion spraying forthe control of Aedes aegypti in Colima, México. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002, 56:148-152.
• [11]Itrat A, Khan A, Javaid S, Kamal M, Khan H, Javed S, Kalia S, Khan AH, Sethi MI, Jehan I: Knowledge, awareness and practices regarding dengue fever among the adult population of dengue hit cosmopolitan. PloS one 2008, 3:e2620.
• [12]Koenraadt CJM, Tuiten W, Sithiprasasna R, Kijchalao U, Jones JW, Scott TW: Dengue knowledge and practices and their impact on Aedes aegypti populations in Kamphaeng Phet, Thailand. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2006, 74:692-700.
• [13]Winch PJ, Leontsini E, Rigau-Pérez JG, Ruiz-Pérez M, Clark GG, Gubler DJ: Community-based dengue prevention programs in Puerto Rico: impact on knowledge, behavior, and residential mosquito infestation. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2002, 67:363-70.
• [14]Chinnakali P, Gurnani N, Upadhyay RP, Parmar K, Suri TM, Yadav K: High level of awareness but poor practices regarding dengue fever control: a cross-sectional study from north India. Am J Med Sci 2012, 4:278-82.
• [15]Reidpath DD, Allotey P, Pokhrel S: Social sciences research in neglected tropical diseases 2: A bibliographic analysis. Health research policy and systems / BioMed Central 2011, 9:1.
• [16]WHO and the Health and Environment Linkages Initiative: Better Environmental Management for Control of Dengue. 2013, 1-4.
• [17]Launiala A: How much can a KAP survey tell us about people’s knowledge, attitudes and practices? Anthropol Matters 2009, 11(1):1-13.
• [18]Hausmann-muela S, Ribera JM, Nyamongo I: Health-seeking behaviour and the health system response DCPP working paper. 2003, 14:3-23.
• [19]Dowler E, Green J, Bauer M: Assessing public perception: Issues and methods. In Health, hazards and public debate: Lessons for risk communication from the BSE/CJD saga. Edited by Dora C. Geneva: WHO; 2006:39-60.
• [20]Reiter P: Climate change and mosquito-borne disease. Environ Health Perspect 2011, 109:21.
• [21]Gubler DJ: Dengue and dengue hemorrhagic fever. Clin Microbiol Rev 1998, 11:480-96.
• [22]Almeida AP, Gonçalves YM, Novo MT, Sousa CA, Melim MGA: Vector monitoring of aedes aegypti in the autonomous region of Madeira, Portugal. Euro Surveill 2007.
• [23]Setbon M, Raude J: Population response to the risk of vector-borne diseases: lessons learned from socio-behavioural research during large-scale outbreaks. Emerg Health Threats J 2009, 2:e6.
• [24]Seixas G: Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti (Diptera, Culicidae) from Madeira Island: geographical origin and insecticide resistance. Master thesis. Lisbon: Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa; 2012.
• [25]Sousa CA, Clairouin M, Seixas G, Viveiros B, Novo MT, Silva AC, Escoval MT, Economopoulou A: Ongoing outbreak of dengue type 1 in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, Portugal: preliminary report. Euro Surveill 2012, 17:8-11.
• [26]ECDC: Communicable Disease Threats Report. 2013. http://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/communicable-disease-threats-report-9-feb-2013.pdf webcite
• [27]Rezza G: Aedes albopictus and the reemergence of Dengue. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:72.
• [28]Gould EA, Gallian P, De Lamballerie X, Charrel RN: First cases of autochthonous dengue fever and chikungunya fever in France: from bad dream to reality! Clin Microbiol Infect 2010, 16:1702-1704.
• [29]Wright WF, Pritt BS: Update: The diagnosis and management of dengue virus infection in North America. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2012, 73:215-20.
• [30]ECDC: Rapid Communications. 2013.
• [31]Instituto Nacional de Estatística: Censos 2001 Resultados Definitivos. Região Autónoma da Madeira: XIV recenseamento geral da população. IV recenseamento geral da habitação; 2002.
• [32]Armitage CJ, Cower M: Social cognition models and health behaviour: a structured review. Psychol Health 2000, 15:173-189.
• [33]Pelto PJ, Pelto G: Studying knowledge, culture, and behavior in applied medical anthropology. Med Anthropol Q 1997, 11(2):147-163.
• [34]Kirkby K, Galappaththy GNL, Kurinczuk JJ, Rajapakse S, Fernando SD: Knowledge, attitudes and practices relevant to malaria elimination amongst resettled populations in a post-conflict district of northern Sri Lanka. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 2012. doi:10.1093/trstmh/trs015
• [35]Raude J, Chinfatt K, Huang P, Betansedi CO, Katumba K, Vernazza N, Bley D: Public perceptions and behaviours related to the risk of infection with Aedes mosquito-borne diseases: a cross-sectional study in Southeastern France. BMJ open 2012., 2
• [36]Dégallier N, Vilarinhos PT, de Carvalho MS, Knox M, Caetano J Jr: People’s knowledge and practice about dengue, its vectors and control means in Brasilia (DF), Brazil: its relevance with entomological factors. J AM Mosq Control Assoc. 2000, 16(2):114-23.
• [37]Rosenbaum J, Nathan MB, Ragoonanansingh R, Rawlins S, Gayle C, Chadee DD, Lloyd LS: Community participation in dengue prevention and control: a survey of knowledge, attitudes, and practice in Trinidad and Tobago. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1995, 53:111-7.
• [38]Medronho RA, Macrini L, Novellino DM, Lagrotta MTF, Câmara VM, Pedreira CE: Aedes aegypti immature forms distribution according to type of breeding site. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2009, 80:401-404.
• [39]Burkot TR, Handzel T, Schmaedick MA, Tufa J, Roberts JM, Graves PM: Productivity of natural and artificial containers for Aedes polynesiensis and Aedes aegypti in four American Samoan villages. Med Vet Entomol 2007, 21:22-29.
• [40]Bagny L, Delatte H, Elissa N, Quilici S, Fontenille D: Aedes (diptera: culicidae) vectors of arboviruses in Mayotte (Indian ocean): distribution area and larval habitats. J Med Entomol 2009, 46(2):198-207.
• [41](WHO) PW and LL: Planning Social Mobilization and Communication for Dengue Fever Prevention and Control. 2004, 35-36.