Publication: Predictors of malaria-association with rubber plantations in Thailand
2
Issued Date
2012
Resource Type
Language
eng
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
BioMed Central
Bibliographic Citation
BMC Public Health. Vol.12, (2012), 1115
Suggested Citation
Pratana Satitvipawee, Warunnee Wongkhang, Sarika Pattanasin, Penprapai Hoithong, Adisak Bhumiratana Predictors of malaria-association with rubber plantations in Thailand. BMC Public Health. Vol.12, (2012), 1115. Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/2769
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Predictors of malaria-association with rubber plantations in Thailand
Abstract
Background: The national Global Fund-supported malaria (GFM) program in Thailand, which focuses on the
household-level implementation of vector control via insecticide-treated nets (ITNs)/long-lasting insecticidal nets
(LLINs) combined with indoor residual spraying (IRS), has been combating malaria risk situations in different
provinces with complex epidemiological settings. By using the perception of malaria villagers (MVs), defined as
villagers who recognized malaria burden and had local understanding of mosquitoes, malaria, and ITNs/LLINs and
practiced preventive measures, this study investigated the predictors for malaria that are associated with rubber
plantations in an area of high household-level implementation coverage of IRS (2007–2010) and ITNs/LLINs
(2008–2010) in Prachuap Khiri Khan Province.
Methods: A structured questionnaire addressing socio-demographics, household characteristics and health
behavioral factors (knowledge, perceptions and practices) regarding the performed interventions was administered
to the 313 households (70 malaria-affected and 243 malaria-unaffected) that had respondents aged ≥18 years of
both genders. In the univariate and multivariate analyses, only 246 (78.6%) MV respondents (62 malaria-affected
and 184 malaria-unaffected) were analyzed to determine the predictors for risk (morbidity).
Results: The majority (70%) of households were covered by IRS. For a combination of ITNs/LLINs, there were 74%
of malaria-affected households covered and 46% of malaria-unaffected households. In a logistic regression analysis
using odds ratios (aORs) adjusted on the variables and a 95% confidence interval (CI), malaria affecting MVs was
associated with daily worker (i.e., earning daily income by normally practicing laborious activities mostly in
agriculture such as rubber tapping and rubber sheet processing at the smallholdings of rubber plantations)
(aOR = 2.9, 95% CI: 1.1-7.4), low-moderate level of malaria knowledge (aOR = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.1-5.0) and sleeping
under mosquito-nets (nets/ITNs/LLINs intermittently and ITNs/LLINs only) (aOR = 2.0, 95% CI: 1.0-3.7). Conclusions: The MV predictors for malaria-association with rubber plantations included occupation (daily worker),
misconceptions about malaria (mosquito and prevention) and the use of mosquito-nets. Human practices such as
revisiting rubber plantations while exposed to multiple bites at multiple locations are more likely to apply to daily
workers than to rubber farmers/tappers and others. The promotion and use of ITNs/LLINs depends substantially on
cultural factors and defensive behaviors relevant to their occupational risk despite the perceived threats of malaria
and the perceived benefits of ITNs/LLINs. This information supports the conclusion that GFM program
implementation in Thailand or elsewhere for malaria-associated with rubber plantations would benefit from the
potential use of ITNs/LLINs and changes in personal protection behaviors.