Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26738734›Full record

ArticleParasitology research2016

Bioactivity and laundering resistance of five commercially available, factory-treated permethrin-impregnated fabrics for the prevention of mosquito-borne diseases: the need for a standardized testing and licensing procedure.

Michael K Faulde, Frederic Pages, Waltraud Uedelhoven

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Parasitology research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Alternative strategies for mosquito-borne arbovirus control.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2019
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Michael K FauldeDepartment of Medical Entomology/Zoology, Central Institute of the Bundeswehr Medical Service, PO Box 7340, 56065, Koblenz, Germany. MichaelFaulde@bundeswehr.org.
Frederic PagesRegional Office of the French Institute for Public Health Surveillance (Cire OI, Institut de Veille Sanitaire), Saint-Denis, Réunion, France.
Waltraud UedelhovenBundeswehr Research Institute for Materials, Explosives, Fuels, and Lubricants, Erding, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Personal protective measures against hematophagous vectors constitute the first line of defense against arthropod-borne diseases. In this regard, a major advance has been the development of residual insecticides that can be impregnated into clothing. Currently, however, information on specific treatment procedures, initial insecticide concentrations, arthropod toxicity, residual activity, and laundering resistance is either fragmentary or non-existent, and no World Health Organization Pesticides Evaluation Scheme or other guidelines exist for the standardized testing and licensing of insecticide-treated clothing. The aim of this study was to analyze the insecticide content, contact toxicity, laundering resistance, and residual activity of five commercially available and commonly used permethrin-treated fabrics-Insect Shield, ExOfficio, Sol's Monarch T-shirts, battle dress uniforms (BDUs), and Labonal socks-against vector-competent Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi, and Culex pipiens mosquitoes under laboratory conditions. Prior to laundering, permethrin concentrations ranged from 4300 to 870 mg/m(2) whereas, after 100 defined machine launderings, the remaining permethrin content fell to between 1800 and 20 mg/m(2), a percentage permethrin loss of 58.1 to 98.5 %. The highest 99 % knockdown (KD99) efficacy of permethrin was detected in Ae. aegypti, followed by An. stephensi and Cx. pipiens demonstrating that Ae. aegypti is the most sensitive species and Cx. pipiens the least sensitive. After 100 launderings, the remaining biocidal efficacy differed markedly among the five brands, with KD99 times varying from 38.8 ± 2.9 to >360 min for Ae. aegypti, from 44 ± 3.5 to >360 min for An. stephensi, and from 98 ± 10.6 to >360 min for Cx. pipiens. Overall, the ranking of the residual biocidal efficacies within the five brands tested was as follows: BDU ≈ Labonal > Sol's Monarch > ExOfficio > Insect Shield. When applying German Armed Forces licensing conditions, none of the four products available in the civilian market would completely meet all the necessary efficacy and safety requirements fulfilled by BDUs. Therefore, we strongly recommend standardized testing and licensing procedures for insecticide-treated clothing, with defined cutoff values for initial maximum and post-laundering minimum concentrations of permethrin as well as figures for permethrin migration rates, arthropod toxicity, homogeneity on fabrics, residual activity, and laundering resistance.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsClothingCulexFemaleHumansInsect Bites and StingsInsecticidesInsect VectorsLaunderingMosquito ControlPermethrinReference StandardsTextile IndustryInsecticidesPermethrinArthropod-bite preventionLaundering resistancePermethrin-impregnated clothingPersonal protectionPyrethroidsResidual activityStandardization procedure

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.