首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions when malaria mortality is low: insecticide-treated nets versus in-house residual spraying in India.
【24h】

Cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions when malaria mortality is low: insecticide-treated nets versus in-house residual spraying in India.

机译:当疟疾死亡率低时,采取疟疾控制干预措施的成本效益:印度使用杀虫剂处理过的蚊帐与内部残留喷洒相比。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Malaria is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the developing world and a major public health problem in India. Disillusioned by in-house residual spraying (IRS), and increasingly aware that insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) have proved to be effective in reducing malaria mortality and morbidity in various epidemiological settings, policy-makers in India are keen to identify which is the more cost-effective malaria control intervention. A community randomised controlled trial was set up in Surat to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of IRS and ITNs. Both control strategies were shown to be effective in preventing malaria over the base-case scenario of early diagnosis and prompt treatment. The mean costs per case averted for ITNs was statistically significantly lower (Rs. 1848, 1567-2209; US
机译:疟疾是发展中国家发病和死亡的主要原因之一,也是印度的主要公共卫生问题。通过内部残留喷洒(IRS)破灭,并逐渐意识到经杀虫剂处理的蚊帐(ITN)已被证明可有效降低各种流行病学背景下的疟疾死亡率和发病率,印度的政策制定者热衷于确定哪一种是更具成本效益的疟疾控制干预措施。在苏拉特建立了社区随机对照试验,以比较IRS和ITN的有效性和效率。在早期诊断和迅速治疗的基本情况下,两种控制策略均显示出可有效预防疟疾。从统计上来说,每例避免ITN的平均费用要低得多(卢比:1848、1567-2209;美国

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号