Search

Emerging mosquito-borne viruses like Zika, dengue, and chikungunya pose a major threat to public health, especially in low-income regions of Central and South America, southeast Asia, and the Caribbean. Outbreaks of these diseases are likely to have long-term social and economic consequences due to Zika-induced congenital microcephaly and other complications. Larval control of the container-inhabiting mosquitoes that transmit these infections is an important tool for mitigating outbreaks. However, metapopulation theory suggests that spatiotemporally uneven larvicide treatment can impede control effectiveness, as recolonization compensates for mortality within patches. Coordinating the timing of treatment among patches could therefore substantially improve epidemic control, but we must also consider economic constraints, since coordination may have costs that divert resources from treatment. To inform practical disease management strategies, we ask how coordination among neighbors in the timing of mosquito control efforts influences the size of a mosquito-borne infectious disease outbreak under the realistic assumption that coordination has costs. Using an SIR (Susceptible-Infectious-Recovered)/metapopulation model of mosquito and disease dynamics, we examine whether sharing surveillance information and coordinating larvicide treatment among neighboring patches reduces human infections when incorporating coordination costs. We examine how different types of coordination costs and different surveillance methods jointly influence the effectiveness of larval control. We find that the effect of coordination depends on both costs and the type of surveillance used to inform treatment. With epidemiological surveillance, coordination improves disease outcomes, even when costly. With demographic surveillance, coordination either improves or hampers disease control, depending on the type of costs and surveillance sensitivity. Our results suggest coordination among neighbors can improve management of mosquito-borne epidemics under many, but not all, assumptions about costs. Therefore, estimating coordination costs is an important step for most effectively applying metapopulation theory to strategies for managing outbreaks of mosquito-borne viral infections., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Vector control is still our primary intervention for both prevention and mitigation of epidemics of many vector-borne diseases. Efficiently targeting control measures is important since control can involve substantial economic costs. Targeting is not always straightforward, as transmission of vector-borne diseases is affected by various types of host movement. Here we assess how taking daily commuting patterns into consideration can help improve vector control efforts. We examine three tropical urban centers (San Juan, Recife, and Jakarta) that have recently been exposed to Zika and/or dengue infections and consider whether the distribution of human populations and resulting commuting flows affects the optimal scale at which control interventions should be implemented. We developed a stochastic, spatial model and investigated four control scenarios. The scenarios differed in the spatial extent of their implementation and were: 1) a response at the level of an individual neighborhood; 2) a response targeted at a neighborhood in which infected humans were detected and the one with which it was most strongly connected by human movement; 3) a limited area-wide response where all neighborhoods within a certain radius of the focal area were included; and 4) a collective response where all participating neighborhoods implemented control. The relative effectiveness of the scenarios varied only slightly between different settings, with the number of infections averted over time increasing with the scale of implementation. This difference depended on the efficacy of control at the neighborhood level. At low levels of efficacy, the scenarios mirrored each other in infections averted. At high levels of efficacy, impact increased with the scale of the intervention. As a result, the choice between scenarios will not only be a function of the amount of effort decision-makers are willing to invest, but largely epend on the overall effectiveness of vector control approaches., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

With the emergence or re-emergence of numerous mosquito-borne diseases in recent years, effective methods for emergency vector control responses are necessary to reduce human infections. Current vector control practices often vary significantly between different jurisdictions, and are executed independently and at different spatial scales. Various types of surveillance information (e.g. number of human infections or adult mosquitoes) trigger the implementation of control measures, though the target and scale of surveillance vary locally. This patchy implementation of control measures likely alters the efficacy of control. We modeled six different scenarios, with larval mosquito control occurring in response to surveillance data of different types and at different scales (e.g. across the landscape or in each patch). Our results indicate that: earlier application of larvicide after an escalation of disease risk achieves much greater reductions in human infections than later control implementation; uniform control across the landscape provides better outbreak mitigation than patchy control application; and different types of surveillance data require different levels of sensitivity in their collection to effectively inform control measures. Our simulations also demonstrate a potential logical fallacy of reactive, surveillance-driven vector control: measures stop being implemented as soon as they are deemed effective. This false sense of security leads to patchier control efforts that will do little to curb the size of future vector-borne disease outbreaks. More investment should be placed in collecting high quality information that can trigger early and uniform implementation, while researchers work to discover more informative metrics of human risk to trigger more effective control., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recent epidemics of mosquito‐borne dengue and Zika viruses demonstrate the urgent need for effective measures to control these diseases. The best method currently available to prevent or reduce the size of outbreaks is to reduce the abundance of their mosquito vectors, but there is little consensus on which mechanisms of control are most effective, or when and where they should be implemented. Although the optimal methods are likely context dependent, broadly applicable strategies for mosquito control, such as how to distribute limited resources across a landscape in times of high epidemic risk, can mitigate (re)emerging outbreaks. We used mathematical simulations to examine how the spatial distribution of larval mosquito control affects the size of disease outbreaks, and how mosquito metapopulation dynamics and demography might impact the efficacy of different spatial distributions of control. We found that the birth rate and mechanism of density‐dependent regulation of mosquito populations affected the average outbreak size across all control distributions. These factors also determined whether control distributions favoring the interior or the edges of the landscape most effectively reduced human infections. Thus, understanding local mosquito population regulation and dispersion can lead to more effective control strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]