Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management

Abstract Background Vector-borne diseases (VBDs) and mosquito control programs (MCPs) diverge in settings and countries, and lead control specialists need to be aware of the most effective control strategies. Integrated Vector Management (IVM) strategies, once implemented in MCPs, aim to reduce cost and optimize protection of the populations against VBDs. This study presents a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis to compare IVM strategies used by MCPs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador. This research evaluates MCPs strategies to improve vector control activities. Methods Methods included descriptive findings of the MCP operations. Information was obtained from vector control specialists, directors, and residents through field trips, surveys, and questionnaires. Evaluations of the strategies and assets of the control programs where obtained through SWOT analysis and within an IVM approach. Results Organizationally, the Floridian MCP is a tax-based District able to make decisions independently from county government officials, with the oversight of an elected board of commissioners. The Guayas program is directed by the country government and assessed by non-governmental organizations like the World health Organization. Operationally, the Floridian MCP conducts entomological surveillance and the Ecuadorian MCP focuses on epidemiological monitoring of human disease cases. Strengths of both MCPs were their community participation and educational programs. Weaknesses for both MCPs included limitations in budgets and technical capabilities. Opportunities, for both MCPs, are additional funding and partnerships with private, non-governmental, and governmental organizations. Threats experienced by both MCPs included political constraints and changes in the social and ecological environment that affect mosquito densities and control efforts. IVM pillars for policy making were used to compare the information among the programs. Differences included how the Ecuadorian MCP relies heavily on the community for vector control while the American MCP relies on technologies and research. Conclusion IVM based recommendations direct health policy leaders toward improving surveillance systems both entomologically and epidemiologically, improving community risk perceptions by integrating components of community participation, maximizing resources though the use of applied research, and protecting the environment by selecting low-risk pesticides. Outcomes of the research revealed that inter-sectorial and multidisciplinary interventions are critical to improve public health.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Naranjo, Diana P, Qualls, Whitney A, Jurado, Hugo, Perez, Juan C, Xue, Rui-De, Gomez, Eduardo, Beier, John C
Format: Journal Article biblioteca
Language:English
Published: 2014-07-02
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-674
http://hdl.handle.net/2139/38658
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:oai:uwispace.sta.uwi.edu:2139:2139-38658
record_format koha
spelling oai:oai:uwispace.sta.uwi.edu:2139:2139-386582016-06-09T16:00:53Z Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management Naranjo, Diana P Qualls, Whitney A Jurado, Hugo Perez, Juan C Xue, Rui-De Gomez, Eduardo Beier, John C Abstract Background Vector-borne diseases (VBDs) and mosquito control programs (MCPs) diverge in settings and countries, and lead control specialists need to be aware of the most effective control strategies. Integrated Vector Management (IVM) strategies, once implemented in MCPs, aim to reduce cost and optimize protection of the populations against VBDs. This study presents a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis to compare IVM strategies used by MCPs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador. This research evaluates MCPs strategies to improve vector control activities. Methods Methods included descriptive findings of the MCP operations. Information was obtained from vector control specialists, directors, and residents through field trips, surveys, and questionnaires. Evaluations of the strategies and assets of the control programs where obtained through SWOT analysis and within an IVM approach. Results Organizationally, the Floridian MCP is a tax-based District able to make decisions independently from county government officials, with the oversight of an elected board of commissioners. The Guayas program is directed by the country government and assessed by non-governmental organizations like the World health Organization. Operationally, the Floridian MCP conducts entomological surveillance and the Ecuadorian MCP focuses on epidemiological monitoring of human disease cases. Strengths of both MCPs were their community participation and educational programs. Weaknesses for both MCPs included limitations in budgets and technical capabilities. Opportunities, for both MCPs, are additional funding and partnerships with private, non-governmental, and governmental organizations. Threats experienced by both MCPs included political constraints and changes in the social and ecological environment that affect mosquito densities and control efforts. IVM pillars for policy making were used to compare the information among the programs. Differences included how the Ecuadorian MCP relies heavily on the community for vector control while the American MCP relies on technologies and research. Conclusion IVM based recommendations direct health policy leaders toward improving surveillance systems both entomologically and epidemiologically, improving community risk perceptions by integrating components of community participation, maximizing resources though the use of applied research, and protecting the environment by selecting low-risk pesticides. Outcomes of the research revealed that inter-sectorial and multidisciplinary interventions are critical to improve public health. Peer Reviewed 2014-07-10T15:00:05Z 2014-07-10T15:00:05Z 2014-07-02 2014-07-10T15:00:06Z Journal Article BMC Public Health. 2014 Jul 02;14(1):674 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-674 http://hdl.handle.net/2139/38658 en Diana P Naranjo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. text/xml application/pdf
institution UWI TT
collection DSpace
country Trinidad y Tobago
countrycode TT
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-uwi-tt
tag biblioteca
region Caribe
libraryname UWI library system TT
language English
description Abstract Background Vector-borne diseases (VBDs) and mosquito control programs (MCPs) diverge in settings and countries, and lead control specialists need to be aware of the most effective control strategies. Integrated Vector Management (IVM) strategies, once implemented in MCPs, aim to reduce cost and optimize protection of the populations against VBDs. This study presents a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis to compare IVM strategies used by MCPs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador. This research evaluates MCPs strategies to improve vector control activities. Methods Methods included descriptive findings of the MCP operations. Information was obtained from vector control specialists, directors, and residents through field trips, surveys, and questionnaires. Evaluations of the strategies and assets of the control programs where obtained through SWOT analysis and within an IVM approach. Results Organizationally, the Floridian MCP is a tax-based District able to make decisions independently from county government officials, with the oversight of an elected board of commissioners. The Guayas program is directed by the country government and assessed by non-governmental organizations like the World health Organization. Operationally, the Floridian MCP conducts entomological surveillance and the Ecuadorian MCP focuses on epidemiological monitoring of human disease cases. Strengths of both MCPs were their community participation and educational programs. Weaknesses for both MCPs included limitations in budgets and technical capabilities. Opportunities, for both MCPs, are additional funding and partnerships with private, non-governmental, and governmental organizations. Threats experienced by both MCPs included political constraints and changes in the social and ecological environment that affect mosquito densities and control efforts. IVM pillars for policy making were used to compare the information among the programs. Differences included how the Ecuadorian MCP relies heavily on the community for vector control while the American MCP relies on technologies and research. Conclusion IVM based recommendations direct health policy leaders toward improving surveillance systems both entomologically and epidemiologically, improving community risk perceptions by integrating components of community participation, maximizing resources though the use of applied research, and protecting the environment by selecting low-risk pesticides. Outcomes of the research revealed that inter-sectorial and multidisciplinary interventions are critical to improve public health.
format Journal Article
author Naranjo, Diana P
Qualls, Whitney A
Jurado, Hugo
Perez, Juan C
Xue, Rui-De
Gomez, Eduardo
Beier, John C
spellingShingle Naranjo, Diana P
Qualls, Whitney A
Jurado, Hugo
Perez, Juan C
Xue, Rui-De
Gomez, Eduardo
Beier, John C
Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
author_facet Naranjo, Diana P
Qualls, Whitney A
Jurado, Hugo
Perez, Juan C
Xue, Rui-De
Gomez, Eduardo
Beier, John C
author_sort Naranjo, Diana P
title Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
title_short Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
title_full Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
title_fullStr Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
title_full_unstemmed Vector control programs in Saint Johns County, Florida and Guayas, Ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
title_sort vector control programs in saint johns county, florida and guayas, ecuador: successes and barriers to integrated vector management
publishDate 2014-07-02
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-674
http://hdl.handle.net/2139/38658
work_keys_str_mv AT naranjodianap vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT quallswhitneya vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT juradohugo vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT perezjuanc vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT xueruide vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT gomezeduardo vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
AT beierjohnc vectorcontrolprogramsinsaintjohnscountyfloridaandguayasecuadorsuccessesandbarrierstointegratedvectormanagement
_version_ 1756094954014244864