TABLE 7.
IRS Refusal Rates During the Second Spray Round Among Intervention and Control Households, by District and Block, Bihar and Jharkhand States of India, 2016
| District | Block | % IRS Refusal |
ORa | 95% CI | P Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Control | |||||
| Bihar | 6.20 | 20.90 | 0.24 | (0.09, 0.62) | <.001 | |
| Araria | Forbesganj | 5.63 | 51.39 | 0.06 | (0.02, 0.15) | <.001 |
| Gopalganj | Baruali | 3.16 | 15.08 | 0.18 | (0.05, 0.63) | .01 |
| Katihar | Kadwa | 3.68 | 4.62 | 0.79 | (0.21, 3.04) | .73 |
| Muzaffarpur | Paroo | 11.96 | 16.65 | 0.67 | (0.30, 1.48) | .32 |
| Purnia | Kaswa | 5.18 | 1.67 | 2.58 | (0.49, 13.62) | .26 |
| Samastipur | Sarairanjan | 12.72 | 26.11 | 0.43 | (0.20, 0.89) | .02 |
| Saran | Dariyapur, Garkha | 9.08 | 32.84 | 0.20 | (0.09, 0.45) | <.001 |
| Sitamarhi | Dumra | 5.63 | 37.79 | 0.10 | (0.04, 0.26) | <.001 |
| Siwan | Barhariya | 3.96 | 12.44 | 0.31 | (0.10, 0.98) | .05 |
| Vaishali | Mahua | 1.44 | 10.12 | 0.09 | (0.01, 0.72) | .02 |
| Jharkhand | 12.20 | 33.40 | 0.28 | (0.13, 0.58) | <.001 | |
| Dumka | Ramgarh | 1.18 | 34.72 | 0.02 | (0.00, 0.14) | <.001 |
| Godda | Sundarpahari | 18.76 | 44.73 | 0.29 | (0.15, 0.54) | <.001 |
| Pakur | Littipara | 19.07 | 25.07 | 0.70 | (0.36, 1.38) | .31 |
| Sahibganj | Borio | 9.82 | 29.09 | 0.27 | (0.12, 0.60) | <.001 |
| Total (Bihar and Jharkhand) | 7.95 | 24.45 | 0.27 | (0.11, 0.62) | <.001 | |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; IRS, indoor residual spraying.
a
OR estimated based on assumption that the percentage of households that accepted IRS in the intervention areas would have refused IRS had they not been exposed to the BCC intervention. For example, in Araria district, 5.63% of households exposed to BCC activities still refused IRS. Therefore, we assume that 94.37% of households would have refused IRS if they had not been exposed to the BCC intervention, keeping aside confounders and outliers.