Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2026

09:32
Protocols for Testing the Toxicity of Novel Insecticidal Chemistries to Mosquitoes
Published on: February 13, 2019
15.6K
Testing indoor residual spraying coverage targets for malaria control, Bioko, Equatorial Guinea
Guillermo A García1, Dianna E B Hergott2, David S Galick3
1MCD Global Health, 8403 Colesville Road, Silver Spring, MD20910, United States of America (USA).
Bulletin of the World Health Organization
|June 13, 2025
Summary
A 50% indoor residual spraying coverage is non-inferior to 80% for malaria control. This finding supports using lower coverage targets to improve cost-effectiveness and equity in malaria prevention programs.
Area of Science:
- Public Health
- Infectious Disease Epidemiology
- Vector Control
Background:
- Indoor residual spraying (IRS) is a key malaria control strategy.
- Current IRS guidelines recommend 80% household coverage.
- Lower coverage may increase feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and equity.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the non-inferiority of 50% IRS coverage compared to 80% coverage for malaria control.
- To assess the impact of reduced IRS coverage on Plasmodium falciparum infection rates.
Main Methods:
- A cluster-randomized trial was conducted in Bioko, Equatorial Guinea (2021-2022).
- Two arms were established: 80% IRS coverage (control) and 50% IRS coverage (intervention).
- Malaria infection was assessed annually using rapid diagnostic tests; difference-in-differences analysis was employed.
Main Results:
- Post-intervention, odds of malaria infection were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.72-1.29) in the 50% arm and 1.11 (95% CI: 0.81-1.52) in the 80% arm.
- Adjusted analysis showed no significant difference in the change of P. falciparum infection odds between arms (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.58-1.36).
- The upper bound of the confidence interval was below the non-inferiority margin of 1.43.
Conclusions:
- 50% IRS coverage demonstrated non-inferiority to 80% coverage in reducing malaria infection.
- Lower IRS coverage targets can be considered to enhance program feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and equity.
- Findings support adapting IRS coverage levels based on local operational contexts.

