<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JBM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Biosciences and Medicines</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2327-5081</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jbm.2024.123005</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JBM-131700</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Evaluation of the Use of Long-Lasting Impregnated Mosquito Nets (LLINs) in the Health District of Dimbokro (Center of C&amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire)
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ellélé</surname><given-names>Aimé Marius Yapi</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tanoh</surname><given-names>Amany Serge Raymond N’krumah</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bi</surname><given-names>Yourou Guillaume Zamina</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Martial</surname><given-names>Bama</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Assikohon</surname><given-names>Pulchérie Gouzilé</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Amoin</surname><given-names>Nadège Abo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Issaka</surname><given-names>Tiembre</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff6"><sup>6</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff6"><addr-line>Vaccinology Sub-Directorate, National Institute of Public Hygiene (INHP), Abidjan, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>General Hygiene Department, Institut National d’HygiènePublique (INHP), Abidjan, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff5"><addr-line>Epidemiological Surveillance Service, Health District, Dimbokro, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Public Health Emergency Operations Center, National Institute of Public Hygiene (INHP), Abidjan, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Animal Biology Department, Peléféro Gon Coulibaly University, Korhogo, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Malaria Department, National Institute of Public Hygiene (INHP), Abidjan, C&amp;amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>05</day><month>03</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>44</fpage><lpage>61</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>29,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2024</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>10,</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2024</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>13,</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  The Dimbokro health district has one of the highest incidences of malaria in C
  &amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire, despite numerous campaigns to distribute Long-Acting Impregnated Mosquito Nets (LLINs). Given this observation, what are the population’s attitudes towards LLINs that could explain the high endemicity of malaria in Dimbokro? The aim of this study is to assess the knowledge, attitudes and practices of people in the health area of Nofou, one of the villages in the Dimbokro health district where malaria is most prevalent, with a view to strengthening malaria control strategies. A collection of historical health data (malaria cases and LLIN usage rates) and a cross-sectional questionnaire survey was carried out from July 20 to August 03, 2022 in 400 households selected by systematic random sampling. Data were entered using Epi Info 7 and multivariate statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS 22 software. In the Dimbokro health district, the rate of LLIN use was negatively correlated (r = -0.771) with malaria incidence over the six years of historical data collection. Households had an average of 53% good knowledge, 68.6% good practices and 28.4% good attitudes towards LLINs. The study also revealed that the main factors explaining LLIN use in the Nofou health area are mosquito bite (ORa = 5.29 (1.12 - 25.04)), age of household members (ORa = 1.07 (1.01 - 1.14)) and marital status (ORa = 8.45 (1.70 - 45.02)). Awareness-raising on the use of LLINs should be intensified in the Dimbokro health district. Other control strategies, such as vector control and environmental sanitation, should be considered to combat malaria.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Malaria</kwd><kwd> LLINs</kwd><kwd> Knowledge</kwd><kwd> Attitudes</kwd><kwd> Practices</kwd><kwd> Dimbokro</kwd><kwd> C&amp;ocirc;te d’Ivoire</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Long-Acting Insecticide-Treated Mosquito Nets (LLINs) are the main means of combating malaria in regions of the world where this disease is rife [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref1">1</xref>] . Indeed, at global level, the number of deaths due to malaria decreased from 625,000 to 619,000 from 2020 to 2021, but remained higher than the 568,000 deaths estimated in 2019. Malaria cases continued to rise in 2021, but at a slower rate than in 2019-2020. They were estimated at 247 million in 2021, 245 million in 2020 and 232 million in 2019 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref2">2</xref>] . The use of LLINs is one of the prevention strategies recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in malaria control programs. However, this method of universal coverage of populations with LLINs in the fight against malaria still presents difficulties in its possession and use by households.</p><p>Sub-Saharan Africa is the hardest hit, with 95% of cases and 96% of deaths, 80% of which occur in children under 5 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref3">3</xref>] . Given this situation, one of the most effective methods of combating malaria recommended by the WHO is the use of LLINs in households in malaria-affected countries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>However, morbidity and mortality due to this disease are still high in sub-Saharan Africa, despite the many efforts made by national and international public health organizations. According to [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref5">5</xref>] , in Africa 46% of the population did not have an LLIN, and 53% of children under the age of five did not sleep under one. In Benin, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref6">6</xref>] emphasized the importance of using LLINs to protect against culicidal nuisance. However, less than 50% of children aged 0 to 5 sleep under an LLIN. The parents of these children use LLINs to protect young vegetable plants. In recent years, Sierra Leone has undertaken extensive efforts to prevent malaria, and the use of impregnated mosquito nets among children under five has increased by 66% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref7">7</xref>] . In Niger, cultural beliefs are not the main barrier to the use of LLINs. On the other hand, knowledge as well as social, technical, environmental and economic dimensions explain the non-use of LLINs at community level [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref8">8</xref>] . In Cameroon, the level of education, and both sociological and anthropological considerations play their part in this refusal to use mosquito nets. Complaints related to discomfort, suffocation under a net, irritation due to the insecticide contained in the LLIN, damage to bedroom walls due to the installation of the net and the white color of the LLIN associated with the shroud are also reasons cited [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref10">10</xref>] .</p><p>C&#244;te d’Ivoire, like other tropical African countries, is not spared the threat of malaria. It is one of the major causes of hospitalization in First Contact Health Establishments (FCHEs), with an incidence rate in 2020 of 173‰ generally in population and 441‰ in children under 5 years of age [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref11">11</xref>] . In C&#244;te d’Ivoire, over 73% of the population lives in regions where the annual incidence of malaria ranges from 150‰ to over 300‰ inhabitants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref11">11</xref>] . With a view to curbing this endemic, the Ivorian government, aided by international partners, has organized several LLIN distribution campaigns. As a result, the LLIN usage rate, which was 33% in 2012, rose to 50% in 2016 and to over 63% in 2019, following the distribution of over 15 million LLINs in 2017 and 2018. However, this utilization rate (63%) remains below the national target set at 80% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref13">13</xref>] . In C&#244;te d’Ivoire, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref14">14</xref>] also mentioned that the reasons for non-use of the LLIN are its shape, color and cost of acquisition.</p><p>Like other health districts in C&#244;te d’Ivoire, the Dimbokro health district has benefited from two LLIN distribution campaigns, in 2017 and 2021 respectively. However, despite the efforts made by the health authorities to reduce the incidence of malaria, this health district still has one of the highest incidences in C&#244;te d’Ivoire. Indeed, in 2021, in the general population, the incidence of malaria in Dimbokro was 262.75 ‰ versus 173.43 ‰ at national level and 633‰ versus 441‰ at national level in children under five [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref11">11</xref>] .</p><p>In view of the above, it is necessary to know the knowledge, attitudes and practices of the population of the Dimbokro health district with regard to LLINs, hence the interest of this study.</p><p>The aim of our work is to assess household use of long-acting insecticide-impregnated mosquito nets (LLINs) in order to better orient malaria control strategies in the Dimbokro health district, where this disease remains prevalent.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Area</title><p>This study was carried out in the Nofou health area, part of the Dimbokro health district in central C&#244;te d’Ivoire, around 80 km from Yamoussoukro (political capital) and 240 km from Abidjan (economic capital). Located between 6&#176;36 and 7&#176;00 N latitude North and 4˚36 and 4˚48 longitude West, the Dimbokro health district has a Baoulean equatorial climate, influenced by harmattan and monsoon. It is characterized by a long (October to March) and short (August to September) dry season, as well as a long (April to June) and short (July - August) rainy season. Average monthly temperatures range from 27 to 30˚C. The N’ZI river, the most important watercourse, crosses the department from north to south [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref15">15</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Choix de la Zoned’&#233;tude</title><p>The choice of this survey locality was justified by the fact that retrospective data collection of malaria casescarried out at the Dimbokro Departmental Health Directorate, where public health data are archivedshowed the Nofou health area to be the most prevalent malaria zone in the Dimbokro health district. In addition, the insalubrious situation in Nofou prompted the installation of Local Sanitation, Health and Hygiene Committees (CLASH) and the organization of a major household clean-up and sanitation operation (grass, household waste, puddles, etc.) initiated by the sub-prefectoral authority with technical and material support from the Yamoussoukro Regional Sanitation and Health Department. The choice of Nofou is also justified by the population’s reliance on river water, whose poor quality has been the cause of many diarrhoeal diseases and infant mortality over the past two years.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Study Population and Inclusion Criteria</title><p>Our study population consisted of households in the Nofou health area. During the survey, we included households that owned an LLIN and had lived in the study area for 6 months or more, but excluded households that did not own an LLIN, had not given written consent, or had lived in the study area for less than 6 months.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Type of Study</title><p>Retrospective study: collection of historical health data</p><p>Historical malaria cases from seventeen (17) public health centers were collected at the Dimbokro Departmental Health Directorate, where all health data from public health establishments are archived. In addition to malaria cases, annual rates of LLIN use were also recorded. The cases of malaria and rates of LLIN use collected cover the period 2017-2022, from July 20 to August 03, 2022.</p><p>Descriptive study: cross-sectional household survey</p><p>A descriptive cross-sectional household survey was carried out from July 20 to August 03, 2022 in the Nofou health area. The survey was preceded by training on data collection tools and survey methodology.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Sample Size</title><p>The size (n) of households to be surveyed in the Nofou health area, increased by 10%, was calculated using the following formulain “Equation (1)” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref16">16</xref>] :</p><p>n = t 2 &#215; p ( 1 − p ) / e 2 (1)</p><p>t: confidence level deduced from the confidence interval. We generally take the value 1.96 for a 95% confidence level (centered reduced normal distribution).</p><p>p: net usage rate set at 63% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref17">17</xref>] .</p><p>e: margin of error set at 5%.</p><p>n = 400 households.</p><p>A total of 400 households were surveyed in the Nofou health area.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. Data Collection</title><sec id="s2_6_1"><title>2.6.1. Data Collection Tools</title><p>A questionnaire was drawn up and submitted to public health experts at the Institut National d’Hygi&#232;nePublique (INHP) for correction and validation.</p><p>Next, a pre-survey was carried out from April 4 to 5, 2021 among 25 households in a district of the town of Bocanda with the same socio-demographic characteristics as the study area, with the aim of testing the questionnaire, correcting any errors and ambiguities, familiarizing interviewers with the various questions and assessing the duration of questionnaire administration.</p><p>The questionnaire was structured in three parts:</p><p>- Socio-demographic characteristics (Sex, Age, Social Status, Educational level, Marital status, Household size).</p><p>- Household knowledge of malaria and LLINs (Mode of transmission of malaria, Malaria serious illness, Methods to combat malaria, Role of the LLIN, when to use the LLIN, People who must use the LLIN, Period for sleeping under MILDA).</p><p>- Household Attitudes and Practices towards LLINs (use the night before, Regular use of the LLIN, Reasons for not using the LLIN regularly, LLIN interview, LLIN wash type, Drying of LLIN, LLIN installation, Action taken before MILDA installation, Checking the status of the installed LLIN.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6_2"><title>2.6.2. Data Collection Technique</title><p>The households to be surveyed were selected at random, in order to respect the principle of independence of the choice of households to be surveyed from the interviewer through systematic random sampling [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref18">18</xref>] . Within the household, the respondent was the head of the household, represented by the father or mother. If these people were absent during the survey, the questionnaire was administered to an adult member of the household, aged 18 or over, who had lived in the household for at least six (06) months. If all the people in the household were minors (age &lt; 18) or if the household did not consent, it was replaced by another household, following the methodology defined above.</p><p>Accompanied by a translator, the information gathered in the households concerned socio-demographic characteristics, knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding the use of LLINs.</p><p>Direct observations were made on a number of variables: the actual installation of the LLIN, its expiration date, its cleanliness and whether or not it was torn.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s2_7"><title>2.7. Data Processing and Analysis</title><p>The historical malaria cases collected were entered and analyzed using Excel software. These historical data were used to calculate the average incidence of malaria in the various localities of the Dimbokro health district.</p><p>The Pearson correlation test was performed to establish the association between average malaria incidence and the rate of household use of LLINs over the period 2017-2022.</p><p>Data from the cross-sectional household survey were entered using Epi Info version 7 software, and analyses were carried out using IBM SPSS 22.0 for Windows. Analyses focused on the knowledge, attitudes and practices of the population of the Nofou health area with regard to malaria and the use of LLINs.</p><p>A scale of one point per question was awarded in each section. For the eight (08) point score on household knowledge and attitudes to the use of LLINs, a score of less than or equal to four (04) points was considered poor knowledge of LLINs, equivalent to less than 50% correct answers. A score of between four (04) and six (06) points was considered acceptable knowledge, with a proportion of between 50 and 80% correct answers, and a score of over six (06) points was considered good knowledge of malaria and the LLIN, with a proportion of over 80% correct answers.</p><p>Household practices in relation to LLINs were scored out of four (04) points. A score of less than two (02) points was considered poor practice, i.e. less than 50% correct answers, and a score of two (02) points was considered acceptable practice, i.e. 50% correct answers. A score of three (03) and four (04) points was considered good practice with regard to LLINs, equivalent to 75% to 100% correct answers.</p><p>The Chi-square test was used to compare the proportions of categorical variables at the 5% threshold.</p><p>A conditional multivariate analysis by logistic regression using the top-down stepwise method was carried out to identify explanatory factors for LLIN use and control for confounding factors. LLIN use was the dependent variable, while population knowledge, attitudes and practices were the independent variables. At each regression, factors associated with use whose Wald test p-value (Z statistic) was greater than 0.1 were eliminated. Explanatory variables with a p-value between 0.05 and 0.1 were then removed one by one, until the final model contained variables associated with LLIN use with a p-value of 0.05 or less.</p></sec><sec id="s2_8"><title>2.8. Ethical Considerations</title><p>To carry out this study, a research authorization signed by the Direction des Etablissements et des Professionnels Sanitaires (DEPS) was obtained. This authorization was presented to the Regional Health Director of N’ZI, the Departmental Health Director of Dimbokro and the Head Nurse of the CSR of Nofou. The various chiefdoms in the Dimbokro health area were also informed.</p><p>During the survey, each household was informed of the purpose of this study as well as the free and voluntary nature of their participation. Written informed consent was obtained from the different household heads before answering the questions. All those surveyed were reassured that the information collected in this study will remain anonymous and strictly confidential.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Malaria Incidence in Dimbokro Health District</title><p>The highest average incidence of malaria over the period 2017 to 2022 was recorded in the Nofou health area (63‰) making this village the most malaria endemic locality in the Dimbokro health district. The other health areas had an average incidence of at least 20‰ (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Participants</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> shows the various socio-demographic characteristics that influence LLIN use and exposure to malaria.</p><p>The proportion of women surveyed, 58.5%, is statistically more significant than the proportion of men surveyed (p &lt; 0.001). The average age was 45, and the over-50 age group was surveyed in a more significant proportion than the others (p = 0.005). The proportion of unemployed, at 45.3%, is statistically significant (p &lt; 0.001) compared with the other social strata. Almost 61% of respondents are not in school, a proportion that is statistically more significant (p &lt; 0.001) than other levels of education. In terms of household size, the proportion of households with more than five people (42.8%) remains significantly higher than other household size proportions (p &lt; 0.001). Finally, 57% of respondents were married, a proportion that is statistically more significant than singles and widowers (p &lt; 0.001).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Sociodemographic characteristics of households surveyed in the Nofou health area (Dimbokro health district, August 2022)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sociodemographic characteristics (n = 400)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number (n)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%) and 95%CI<sup>a</sup></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sex</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >234</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58.5 (53.5 - 63.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >166</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41.5 (36.6 - 46.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 - 35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >104</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.0 (21.8 - 30.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 - 50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >141</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.3 (30.6 - 40.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Over 50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >155</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38.8 (33.9 - 43.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Social Status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Farmer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >342</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >85.5 (81.7 - 88.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Functionary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.5 (0.6 - 3.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Other social statuses</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.0 (10.1 - 16.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Educational level</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Not in school</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >244</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.0 (56.0 - 65.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.3 (20.1 - 28.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Secondary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.5 (9.4 - 16.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Superior</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3 (1.0 - 4.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bachelor</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >144</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.0 (31.3 - 40.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bride</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >228</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57.0 (52.0 - 61.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Widower/ widow</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.0 (4.7 - 10.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Household size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Five and more</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >171</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.8 (37.8 - 47.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Four</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.3 (15.5 - 23.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Three</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.3 (18.3 - 26.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Two</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.8 (6.2 - 12.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >One</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.0 (4.7 - 10.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>a: 95% Confidence Interval.</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Household Knowledge</title><p>The results in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref> show people’s knowledge of malaria, which influences their exposure to the disease and consequently their willingness to use LLINs.</p><p>Nearly 68% of households in the Nofou health area report malaria transmission by mosquito bite, which is more significant (p &lt; 0.001) than exposure to the sun.</p><p>In the Nofou health area, almost 98% of those surveyed knew that malaria is a dangerous disease, and at least 64% of people in households who said they had</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Knowledge of malaria and LLIN by households in the Nofou health area (Dimbokro health district, August 2022)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Knowledge (n = 400)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number (n)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%) and 95%CI<sup>a</sup></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mode of transmission of malaria (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mosquito bite</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >273</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.3 (63.4 - 72.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sun exposure</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.5 (8.5 - 15.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Do not know</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.8 (11.4 - 18.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malaria serious illness</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >392</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.0 (96.1- 99.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.0 (0.9 - 3.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Visiting a health service</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >257</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.3 (59.3 - 69.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >143</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.8 (31.0 - 40.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Methods to combat malaria (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Use MILDA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >270</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.5 (62.7 - 72.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sanitation of the living environment</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.8 (23.4 - 32.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Use insecticide</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.3 (1.7 - 5.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Role of the LLIN (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Protect yourself against mosquitoes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >375</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93.8 (90.9 - 95.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >When to use the LLIN (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >All day</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.5 (2.7 - 7.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >All night long</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >379</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.8 (92.1 - 96.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Do not know</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >03</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8 (0.1 - 2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >People who must use the LLIN (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Everyone</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >347</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86.7 (83.0-89.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Child under 5 years old</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.3 (4.1 - 9.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pregnant woman</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.8 (3.7 - 8.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >The elderly</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.3 (0.4 - 2.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Period for sleeping under MILDA (yes)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >In rainy season</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (15.3 - 23.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >In dry season</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.0 (0.9 - 3.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Knowledge Score Level</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bad ≤ 3 or ≤50%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.3 (13.7 - 21.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acceptable 4 - 6 or 50% - 79%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.3 (11.0 - 18.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good 6 - 8 or 80% - 100%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >274</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.5 (63.7 - 73.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>A: 95% Confidence interval.</p><p>been ill had attended a health center.</p><p>The use of LLINs was perceived by 67.5% as the primary method of combating malaria, ahead of sanitation and the use of insecticides.</p><p>In the study area, almost 94% of households knew that LLINs were used for protection against mosquito bites, and slept under them at night.</p><p>In the Nofou health area, less than 7% of pregnant women, children under 5 and the elderly use LLINs.</p><p>Households surveyed use LLINs more in the rainy season (19%) than in the dry season (2%). There was a significant difference between the proportion of households using LLINs in the rainy and dry seasons (p &lt; 0.001). 21% of households surveyed knew that the duration of effectiveness of the LLIN was three years. Finally, with regard to the score, in the Nofou health area, the proportion of households with good knowledge (68.5%) of pa-ludism and LLINs was more significant than poor and acceptable knowledge (p &lt; 0.001).</p></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Household Attitudes</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> shows the various attitudes that condition the correct use of LLINs by the population and could reduce the incidence of malaria in the Nofou health area.</p><p>InNofou, 79.8% of people claimed to have used the LLIN the night before the survey, astatistically significant proportion (p &lt; 0.001) compared with those who did not sleep under the LLIN.</p><p>The proportion of 60% of households who stated that heat was the main reason for not using the LLIN on a regular basis is significant compared to other reasons for non-use (p &lt; 0.05). Nearly 10% of households gave no reason for not using the LLIN on a regular basis.</p><p>With regard to the maintenance of LLINs, nearly 74% of households washed their LLINs. Nearly 41% of households washed it using soap. On the other hand, 33.2% used plain water for washing. Detergent washing (bleach) was used by 26%.</p><p>In the Nofou health zone, 63.4% of households dried their LLINs in the shade, while 36.6% dried them in the sun.</p><p>Regarding the score in the Nofou health area, the proportion of households (71.3%) with a bad and an acceptable attitude towards LLINs was statistically more significant (p =&lt; 0.001) than the good attitude (28.8%).</p></sec><sec id="s3_5"><title>3.5. Household Practices</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>, which presents people’s practices, is a continuation of the table on attitudes. The results presented in this table reveal the need for people to adopt good LLIN practices in order to reduce the prevalence of malaria.</p><p>In our survey, 88.3% of households had installed an LLIN. The results of our survey show that 80.7% of households opened and spread the LLIN in the shade for 24 hours before installing it. On the other hand, 16.1% of households opened it and set it up in the sun.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Attitudes towards the LLIN reported by households in the Nofou health area (August 2022)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Attitudes (n = 400)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number (n)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%) and 95%CI<sup>a</sup></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLIN use the night before (yes) (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >319</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79.8 (75.5 - 83.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.3 (16.4 - 24.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Regular use of the LLIN (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >183</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45.8 (40.8 - 50.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >217</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.3 (49.2 - 59.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Reasons for not using the LLIN regularly (n = 217)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Heat</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >131</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.4 (53.5 - 66.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No reason</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.8 (14.7 - 25.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cause of inconvenience</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.8 (14.7 - 25.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLIN interview (yes) (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Washing the LLIN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >295</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73.8 (69.1 - 78.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No Washing the LLIN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >105</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.3 (22.0 - 30.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLIN wash type (yes) (n = 295)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wash with soap and water</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40.7 (35.0 - 46.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Simple water wash</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.2 (27.8 - 38.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wash with detergent</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.1 (21.2 - 31.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Drying of LLIN (yes) (n = 295)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Drying in the shade</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >187</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.4 (57.6 - 68.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sun drying</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >108</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.6 (31.1 - 42.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Level Score for Attitude (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bad ≤ 2 or ≤50%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.5 (12.1 - 19.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acceptable = 2 or 50%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >223</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55.8 (50.7 - 60.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good 3 - 4 or ≥75%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >115</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.8 (24.4 - 33.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>a. 95% Confidence interval.</p><table-wrap-group id="4"><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Practices towards the LLIN reported by households in the Nofou health area (August 2022)</title></caption><table-wrap id="4_1"><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Pratiques (n = 400)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number (n)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%) and 95%CI<sup>a</sup></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLIN installation (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >353</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >88.2 (84.7 - 91.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.8 (8.8 - 15.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Action taken before MILDA installation (yes) (n = 353)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Open and install in the shade for 24 hours</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >285</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80.7 (76.2 - 84.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Open and install on the bed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.1 (1.6 - 5.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Open and install in the sun</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.1 (12.5 - 20.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="4_2"><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Checking the status of the installed LLIN (yes) (n = 353)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Torn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.1 (3.0 - 7.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Own</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >258</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73.1 (68.1 - 77.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Expired</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.8 (17.6 - 26.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Level Score for practice (n = 400)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bad &lt; 2 or &lt;50%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.3 (13.7 - 21.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acceptable = 2 or 50%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.3 (11.0 - 18.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Good 3 - 4 or ≥75%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >274</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.5 (63.7 - 73.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></table-wrap-group><p>a. 95% Confidence interval.</p><p>In our study, 73.1% of households had a clean LLIN and 21.8% had an out-of-date LLIN. The proportion of torn LLINs averaged 5.1%.</p><p>In conclusion, the proportion of good LLIN practices (68.5%) was more significant (p &lt; 0.001) than bad and acceptable practices in the Nofou health area.</p></sec><sec id="s3_6"><title>3.6. Identification of LLIN Use Factors in the Nofou Health Area</title><p>The initial and final model of the logistic regression analysis (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>) made it possible to identify three (03) main factors explaining the use of the LLIN in the Nofou health area. These are: the mosquito bite (ORa = 5.29 (1.12 - 25.04)), the age of the respondents (ORa = 1.07 (1.01 - 1.14)) and marital status (ORa = 8.45 (1.70 - 45.02)).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>The aim of this study, which took place in the Dimbokro health district where malaria remains prevalent in C&#244;te d’Ivoire, was to assess household use of LLINs.</p><p>The low level of schooling among respondents is not a barrier to the use of LLINs, nor is marital status or the high number of people living in a household.</p><p>The majority of households (nearly 70%) were aware that malaria is transmitted by mosquito bite. This can be explained by the intensification of communication campaigns to raise awareness of malaria through the media, health personnel, national and local health authorities and community health workers (CHWs). This result is in line with those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref19">19</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref20">20</xref>] , who respectively found a proportion of knowledge about malaria of 72.80% in Darsalam, Mali, and 82% in Moanda, Gabon. Household perception of the seriousness of malaria in the Nofou health area was 98%, which would mean that most respondents were aware of the dangers of this disease. This could be explained by the high incidence of malaria (over 201‰) in the Dimbokro health district [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref11">11</xref>] , higher than the national level of 173‰. Reference [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref21">21</xref>] also found that malaria was considered a dangerous disease by 60.24% of respondents in a study carried out in Chad.This high level of knowledge (68.6%) of malaria is therefore an essential reason why people use LLINs.</p><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Initial and final model of the multivariate analysis by logistic regression (step by step descending) of the factors explaining the use of the LLIN in the Nofou health area (August 2022)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >INITIAL MODEL OF MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Factors studied</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OR (95%CI)<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Coef<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age of respondents</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.077 (0.996 - 1.165)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.074</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.064</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sex</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.103 (0.218 - 20.293)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.743</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.521</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Social status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.923 (0.519 - 1.639)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.081</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.783</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Study level</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.239 (0.401 - 3.834)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.215</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.710</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.377 (1.514 - 85.486)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.432</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.018</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Habitat type</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.950 (0.939 - 9.271)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.082</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.064</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mosquito bite or noise</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102.588 (2.12 - 4961.71)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.631</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.019</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malaria is a dangerous disease</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−20.071</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.999</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sanitation of the living environment</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.618 (0.115 - 3.307)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.481</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.574</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Children under 5 years old</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−21.814</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.998</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pregnant woman</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−23.003</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.998</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Elderly person</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−24.986</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.999</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >During the rainy season</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.286 (0.039 - 2.118)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−1.251</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.220</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >During the dry season</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1256747.157 (0.000)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.044</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.999</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >CONSTANT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.776</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.998</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >FINAL MODEL OF MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Explanatory factors</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >ORa (95%CI)<sup> d</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Coef<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >p-value</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mosquito bite or noise (Yes/No)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.29 (1.12 - 25.04)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.035<sup>e</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age of respondents</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.07 (1.01 - 1.14)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.020<sup>e</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.45 (1.70 - 45.02)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009<sup>e</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >CONSTANT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.998</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>b: Odd Ratio (95% Confidence Interval); c: Coefficient; d: Odd Ratio adjust (95% Confidence Interval); e: Statistically significant.</p><p>However, our study may have limitations of recall and information bias, which certainly affect our results. However, these biases were minimized by applying a well-designed and pre-tested questionnaire, followed by a multivariate analysis using logistic regression, which enabled us to retain significant explanatory factors and control for confounding factors. The final multivariate model identified mosquito bite/noise, age and marital status as factors significantly associated with LLIN use in the Nofou health area. The requirement of a spouse in the couple may influence regular use of LLINs.</p><p>Most households (68%) perceive the use of LLINs as the primary method of combating malaria, followed by environmental sanitation (nearly 28%). This low level of awareness of environmental sanitation shows that people do not perceive it as a real solution for preventing malaria. Our results corroborate those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref22">22</xref>] , who also consider environmental sanitation as a means of preventing malaria in Sunyani, Ghana.</p><p>The majority of households (94%) knew that the LLIN was used for protection against mosquito bites and noise, and slept under it at night. The population of Nofou therefore has a good perception of the LLIN as a means of preventing malaria. Our results are in line with those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref23">23</xref>] , who found an 80% rate of LLIN use in Sam&#232;, Mali.</p><p>Nearly 80% of households surveyed were unaware of the duration of effectiveness of the LLIN, which was 3 years [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref24">24</xref>] . This high proportion reflects households’ lack of awareness of the expiry date of the LLIN, and hence its use beyond that date. This finding on ignorance of the duration of effectiveness of the LLIN in Nofou is identical to that of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref25">25</xref>] in Cameroon.</p><p>In our study, less than 7% of pregnant women and children under 5 used LLINs, which may also explain the high incidence of malaria in the Nofou Health Area. The low rate of LLIN use among pregnant women and children found in our study is contrary to that found by several authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref26">26</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref27">27</xref>] .</p><p>According to seasonal variability, 19% and 2% of households used LLINs in the rainy and dry seasons respectively. Reasons for non-use included heat, suffocation, fatigue due to daily activities such as field work, and neglect. The proportions found in our study are lower than those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref28">28</xref>] , for whom nearly 50% of households use an LLIN depending on the season. For this author, the dry season was identified as one during which people slept less under a mosquito net than the rainy season (86.8%).</p><p>In the Nofou health area, the reported rate of daily use of LLINs is 46%. The high incidence of malaria in this health area could therefore be explained by the low rate of daily use of LLINs. This result is in line with that of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref23">23</xref>] , who found a usage rate of 46% in a study carried out in Mali.</p><p>On the night before the survey, almost 93% of households claimed to have used an LLIN. This high proportion can be explained by the fact that the survey was carried out during the rainy season, when mosquitoes were more prevalent and households were cooler. In rural areas in the south of C&#244;te d’Ivoire, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref29">29</xref>] also found a high rate of LLIN use (97.5%) during the rainy season.</p><p>Over 66% of households washed their LLINs with soap and water, and dried them in the shade or sun. This practice results in the deterioration of LLINs. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref30">30</xref>] in Senegal also concluded that the way in which LLINs are cared for contributes to the deterioration of their physical integrity.</p><p>The study showed that 5.1% of households had their nets torn and 30% of households had their LLINs out of date (more than three years of use). We can deduce that these households were not properly protected and were exposed to malaria. Our results are in line with those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref31">31</xref>] in Cameroon, who noted a breakdown in the physical integrity of the LLINs, given the duration of use (over 36 months) and the maintenance of the latter.</p><p>Washing the net with soap and exposing it to the sun can deteriorate the insecticide and contribute to the tearing of the LLIN. The population’s positive attitude towards the use of LLINs is low (28%). On the whole, this could have a negative influence on the use of LLINs, although practices are fairly acceptable.</p><p>There is a strong negative correlation (r = −0.77; p-value = 0.07) between malaria incidence and the rate of LLIN use over the 2017-2022 period when historical malaria cases were collected. However, the short series of historical health data available could influence the non-significance of the correlation coefficient r between the rate of LLIN use and malaria incidence. Indeed, the negative sign of the correlation coefficient means that a decrease in the rate of LLIN use leads to an increase in the incidence of malaria. The increase in the LLIN usage rate over the years 2018 to 2020 and 2021 to 2022 could be explained by the recent distribution of LLINs over these periods. These new, still-new LLINs are attracting the interest of households in using them.</p><p>Finally, the use of LLINs therefore depends on people’s knowledge, attitudes and practices towards them. A study by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131700-ref32">32</xref>] in the communities of Wolaita also showed that the use of LLINs depends on these factors.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>This study has shown us that the use of LLINs depends on the knowledge, attitudes and practices of households towards them. The majority of households had a good knowledge and practice of LLINs, as well as acceptable attitudes towards them. However, the incidence of malaria remains high in the Nofou health area, despite the acceptable rate of LLIN use. The acceptable rate of LLIN use by households in the Nofou health area, part of the Dimbokro health district, is justified by good knowledge and practices vis-&#224;-vis the LLIN, but is influenced by less positive attitudes towards the latter. The convincing results of this study highlight the need to intensify awareness-raising campaigns on the use of LLINs, despite people’s knowledge of them. In addition, the study showed the urgent need to implement other control policies and strategies, such as vector control and environmental sanitation, to control the incidence of malaria in this region and others with similar characteristics, where malaria remains a public health problem.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Authors’ Contributions</title><p>EAMY, TASRN, BYGZ conceived, developed the idea and wrote the article.MB, APG helped verify the analyses and interpret the results. NAA participated in data acquisition and IT supervised the project. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Regional Health Director of N’ZI, the Departmental Health Director of Dimbokro and the Nurse Major of the CSR of Nofou, who facilitated this study. We would also like to thank the people of Nofou for their warm welcome and support for this study.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Yapi, E.A.M., N’krumah, T.A.S.R., Zamina, B.Y.G., Bama, M., Gouzil&#233;, A.P., Abo, A.N. and Tiembre, I. (2024) Evaluation of the Use of Long-Lasting Impregnated Mosquito Nets (LLINs) in the Health District of Dimbokro (Center of C&#244;te d’Ivoire). Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 12, 44-61. https://doi.org/10.4236/jbm.2024.123005</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.131700-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lynd, A., Gonahasa, S., Staedke, S.G., Oruni, A., Maiteki-Sebuguzi, C., Dorsey, G., Opigo, J., Yeka, A., Katureebe, A., Kyohere, M., Hemingway, J., Kamya, M.R. and Donnelly, M.J. (2019) LLIN Evaluation in Uganda Project (LLINEUP): A Cross-Sectional Survey of Species Diversity and Insecticide Resistance in 48 Districts of Uganda. Parasites &amp; Vectors, 12, Article No. 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-019-3353-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">World Health Organization (2022) World Malaria Report 2022. Geneva, 293 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (2021) Rapport 2021 sur le Paludisme dans le Monde, Dossier d’information, Données et Tendances Régionales. WHO/UCN/GMP/ 2021.09. 15 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">World Health Organization (1987) The Use of Impregnated Bed Nets and Other Materials for Vector-Borne Disease Control: A Report of the WHO/VBC Informal Consultation Held in Geneva, 14-18 February 1989. Genève, 45 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (2023) Région africaine: Progrès Réalisés vers l’Atteinte des Cibles Définies dans la Stratégie Technique Mondiale de Lutte contre le Paludisme 2016-2030. Fiche de Synthèse Analytique. 9 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yadouleton, A., Agbanrin, R., Chabi, C., Houndeton, G., Ursins, F., Tossou, R. and Degla, S. (2017) Impacts de l’Utilisation des Moustiquaires Imprégnées d’Insecticides à Longue Durée d’Action sur le Taux de la Parasitémie Palustre chez les Enfants de 0-5 ans à Natitingou au Nord du Bénin. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies (IJPSAT), 5, 10-16.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Banque Mondiale (2012) Sierra Leone: Distribution de Masse de Moustiquaires Imprégnées d’Insecticide pour Combattre le Paludisme. 1 p. https://www.banquemondiale.org/fr/news/feature/2012/04/25/sierra-leone-fights-malaria-with-mass-distribution-of-treated-mosquito-nets</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Faye, S.L. (2012) Comprendre la non-utilisation des moustiquaires imprégnées à longue durée d’action (MILDA) au Niger. Médecine et Santé Tropicales, 22, 203-209. https://doi.org/10.1684/mst.2012.0058</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Breakthrough ACTION (2020) Enquête sur les déterminants des comportements liés au paludisme: Cameroun. 139 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chongwang, J. (2023) Un tiers des Camerounais n’utilisent pas les moustiquaires qu’ils recoivent, OFM Edition 154, Article Type.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministère de la Santé de l’Hygiène Publique et de la Couverture Maladie Universelle (2021) Rapport Annuel sur la Situation Sanitaire (RASS) 2020. République de Cote d’Ivoire. 593 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Agence Ivoirienne de Presse (2021) L’Opération de Distribution Nationale de Moustiquaires Imprégnées Lancée à Divo. 1 p.https://news.abidjan.net/articles/691321/loperation-de-distribution-nationale-de-moustiquaires-impregnees-lancee-a-divo</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Programme Nationale de Lutte contre le Paludisme (2021) Fin de la Campagne de Distribution Gratuite des Moustiquaires en Cote d’ivoire. 1 p.https://www.pnlpcotedivoire.org/article-detail/8/82/fin-de-la-campagne-de-distribution-gratuite-des-moustiquaires-en-cote-d-ivoire</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Akogbeto, M., Baldet, T., Djouaka, R., Doannio, J.M.C., Doudou, D.T., Konan, L.Y., Monjour, L. and Pare Toe, L. (2006) Representations sociales et pratiques liees a l’utilisation des moustiquaires dans la lutte contre le paludisme en Cote d’Ivoire (Afrique de l’Ouest). Médecine Tropicale, 66, 53-58.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Agence Ivoirienne de Presse (2019) Dimbokro, un Département aux Enormes Potentialités. 1 p.https://news.abidjan.net/articles/663413/dimbokro-un-departement-aux-enormes-potentialites</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Haziza, D. (2008) Notes de Cours échantillonnage. STT-2000 Département de Mathématiques et de Statistique, Université de Montréal, Montréal, 138 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Institut National de la Statistique-INS et ICF (2023) Enquete Démographique et de San-té de Cote d’Ivoire, 2021. INS/Cote d’Ivoire et ICF, Rockville.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Vaughan, J.P. and Morrow, R.H. (1991) Manuel d’Epidémiologie pour la Gestion de la Santé au Niveau du District. Ed. Jouve: OMS, Genève, 187 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kone, R. (2012) Perception et Usage de la Moustiquaire Imprégnée d’Insecticide pour la Lutte Antipaludique au Sein des Ménages à Darsalam et au Badialan III en commune III de Bamako. Thèse de Médecine, Université des Sciences, des Techniques et des technologies de Bamako (USTTB), Bamako, 55 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mabiala, A.N., Nkoghe, J.O., Bisseye, C., Tanga, T. and Mombo, L.E. (2021) Connaissances et Méthodes de Lutte contre le Paludisme au Sein des Ménages de la Cité Minière de Moanda en Zone Semi-Rurale au Sud-Est Gabon. Journal of Applied Biosciences, 159, 16411-16419. https://doi.org/10.35759/JABs.159.5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yandai, F.H., Moundine, K., Djoumbe, E., Boulotigam, K., Moukenet, A., Kodindo, I.D. and Hinzoumbe, C.K. (2017) Perception de Risques du Paludisme et Utilisation des Moustiquaires au Tchad. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences, 11, 228-236. https://doi.org/10.4314/ijbcs.v11i1.18</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Agyemang-Badu, S.Y., Awuah, E., Oduro-Kwarteng, S., Dzamesi, J.Y.W., Dom, N.C. and Kanno, G.G. (2023) Environmental Management and Sanitation as a Malaria Vector Control Strategy: A Qualitative Cross-Sectional Study among Stakeholders, Sunyani Municipality, Ghana. Environmental Health Insights, 17, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/11786302221146890</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sangare, M. (2013) Stratégies de Lutte contre le Paludisme: Utilisation des Moustiquaires Imprégnées d’Insecticides au Sein des Ménages de Samé en Commune du District de Bamako. Thèse de Médecine, Université des Sciences, des Techniques et des technologies de Bamako (USTTB), Bamako, 90 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Programme Nationale de Lutte contre le Paludisme (2020) Comment Eviter le Paludisme. 1 p.https://www.pnlpcotedivoire.org/comment-eviter-le-paludisme/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Boussougou-Sambe, S.T., Awono-Ambene, P., Tasse, G.C.T., Etang, J., Binyang, J.A., Nouage, L.D., Wamba, G., Enyong, P. and Fokam, E.B. (2017) Physical Integrity and Residual Bio-Efficacy of Used LLINs in Three Cities of the South-West Region of Cameroon 4 Years after the First National Mass-Distribution Campaign. Malaria Journal, 16, Article No. 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-017-1690-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gamble, C.L., Ekwaru, J.P. and Kuile, F.O. (2006) Insecticide-Treated Nets for Preventing Malaria in Pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, No. 2, CD003755. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003755.pub2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cilundika, M.P., Nyota, N.O. and Numbi, O.L. (2016) Problématique de l’Utilisation des Moustiquaires Imprégnées d’insecticide à Longue Durée (MILD) chez les Enfants de Moins de 5 ans en République Démocratique du Congo. Pan African Medical Journal, 23, Article No. 101. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2016.23.101.7050</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nkamedjie, P.P.M. (2013) Déterminants de l’Utilisation de la Moustiquaire Imprégnée d’Insecticide à Longue Durée d’Action (MILDA) dans le District de Santé de la Mifi. Mémoire de Master en épidémiologie et Santé Publique, Université de Dschang, Dschang, 69 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tia, E., Kouadio, L., Assi, S.B., Ouassa, A.M.B., N’cho, B.T., Koffi, V., Koné, M., Koffi, K.B., Kesse, B.N. and Kouamé, K.A. (2016) Impact Study of an Active Distribution of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLINs) on the Use Rate and the Transmission of Malaria in Rural Environment in the South of the Cote d’Ivoire. International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies, 17, 1251-1262.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dione, D.A., Faye, O. and Tine, R. (2018) Suivi de la Durabilité des MILDA dans les Conditions Opérationnelles au Sénégal. Rapport Final Enquete sur 3 Années. 67 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nopowo, F.N., Offono, E.L., Tsila, H.G., Mbida, M.A., Tonga, C., Ngo, E.H., Mbongue, R., Kekeunou, S., Ndongo, M.J. and Akono, P.N. (2020) évaluation de l’Efficacité des Moustiquaires Imprégnées 36 mois après leur Distribution dans le Sud Cameroun. Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie Exotique, 113, 289-297. https://doi.org/10.3166/bspe-2021-0159</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131700-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tomass, Z., Alemayehu, B., Balkew, M. and Leja, D. (2016) Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice of Communities of Wolaita, Southern Ethiopia about Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets and Evaluation of Net Fabric Integrity and Insecticidal Activity. Parasites Vectors, 9, Article No. 224. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-016-1494-5</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>