Table 4. Female Phlebotomus argentipes sand fly per household and their comparison between intervention versus control cluster at baseline and follow-up.
| Female P. argentipes sand fly per household; Mean (95% CI) [P-value*] | Average effect on count per household; [95% CI] ǂ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time | EMa | DWLb | ITNc | Controld | EMa vs. Controld | DWLb vs. Controld | ITNc vs. Controld |
| Baseline | 5.4 (4.11, 6.69)[0.879] | 5.48 (4.13, 6.82)[0.621] | 4.60 (3.79, 5.41)[0.528] | 5.92 (4.40, 7.44) | -- | -- | -- |
| 1-month follow-up | 7.62 (5.34, 9.91)[0.018] | 2.44 (1.25, 3.64)[<0.0001] | 5.27 (3.62, 6.91)[<0.0001] | 9.39 (7.63, 11.14) | -1.24 [-3.25, 0.76] | -3.28[-4.61, -1.95] | -2.8[-4.82, -0.77] |
| 3-month follow-up | 5.96 (3.82, 8.09)[0.385] | 1.23 (0.86, 1.61)[0.001] | 2.96 (2.15, 3.77)[0.949] | 4.96 (3.17, 6.74) | 1.52[0.75, 2.29] | -3.06[-5.62, -0.5] | -0.68[-1.35, -0.006] |
| 9-month follow-up | 5.56 (3.85, 7.26)[0.181] | 1.92 (0.87, 2.97)[<0.0001] | 2.30 (1.67, 2.93)[0.024] | 5.42 (1.69, 9.16) | 0.66[-2.48, 3.79] | -1.33[-2.81, 0.14] | -1.8[-4.46, 0.86] |
| 12-month follow-up | 5.64 (3.50, 7.79)[0.025] | 2.39 (1.00, 3.78)[0.005] | 3.38 (2.08, 4.68)[0.279] | 4.17 (1.25, 7.08) | 2.0[0.18, 3.82] | -2.8[-4.82, -0.78] | 0.53[-1.71, 2.78] |
| Average (1–12) months follow-up | 6.20 (4.13, 8.26) | 2.00 (1.00–3.00) | 3.48 (2.38, 4.57) | 6.00 (3.44, 8.53) | 0.74[-1.2, 2.67] | -2.62[-4.47, -0.77] | -1.19[-3.09, 0.72] |
aEM: Environmental management;
bDWL: Durable wall lining;
cITN: Impregnation of bed nets with KO Tab 123,
dControl = no intervention
*P-value for test of mean differences between intervention and control arms
ǂ Crude estimated effect in Female P. argentipes sand fly counts attributed by the intervention compared to control arm. Please see the calculation in statistical analysis.