الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 129 |  |  |
| | | from | 129 | | |
Abstract
Vector borne diseases (VBDs) are transmitted through the bite of infected arthropods like mosquitoes, ticks, mites, fleas, sandflies and black fly causing diseases such as malaria, leishmaniasis, dengue, encephalitis, African sleeping sickness, Rift valley fever, and yellow fever. Mechanical transmission is the conveying method of a vector such as houseflies and cockroaches, when it simply carries pathogenic microorganisms on their body and transfers them to food, eyes...etc. VBDs have major public health importance, they cause human illness that could be fatal or restrict working capacity, and they also act as a barrier to development.
Vector control forms the main part of preventive measures to reduce or interrupt transmission, through activities that either reduce the populations of vectors or reduce human contact with vectors. In 2003, there was anassemblytopromoteanintegratedmanagementapproachtovectorcontrolbytheEasternMediterranean Region countries including Egypt.However,Implementation of IVM strategy requires evaluation of technical and capacity needs of services responsible for delivering vector control activities. To identify barriers and to assess the gap between what is done on the ground and what should be done in order to achieve the IVM strategy adopted by WHO.Thus, this work aimed to assess the quality of vector control services in Alexandria through identification and pointing out the weaknesses in existing systems, to ensure that the new approach addresses priority issues and will have a maximum impact in terms of reduced vector-borne diseases burden.
The present study was implemented in places offering vector control services in Alexandria.These vector control services are either governmental or private pest control companies.Data was collected to assess vector control activities provided by the governmental administrations and the private pest control companies. Such services should include environmental control measures, biological control and chemical control. The latter involved; types of pesticide, availability of equipment used for insecticide application in addition to safe handling of insecticide including safe storehouses and disposal as well as wearing PPE. Community services in the form of; health education, laboratory investigation and paid vector control services for the public were also assessed in addition to performance appraisal for vector control staff.
Furthermore, a community survey for 401 inhabitants was required to estimate presence of insects and rodents in streets andhouses in Alexandria and to estimate knowledge and practices towards control according to the opinion of the residents of the selected districts.Additionally, three workshops were done for capacity building of vector control workers and evaluated by comparing the results of a pretest and a posttest.
Routine vector control activities were mainly in the form of chemical and to a much lesser extent biological control. Neither the governmental vector control administrationsnor private sector perform anyenvironmental control measures. Besides, health education programswere not offered by any of the vector control facilities to the public.Moreover the fees of the private pest control companies are very high in comparison to that of the governmental sector.
In the governmental sector, there was no proper handling of pesticides whether in storage or disposal. Storehouses were not designed to be pesticide storehouses, so they did not fulfill the standards of pesticide storehouse.
Furthermore, most of the safety measures were not fulfilled. The most important was the inaccessibility of storehouses to pesticide delivery or fire fighting vehicles, and inaccessibility or unavailability of firefighting equipment althoughpesticidemay behighly flammableorexplosive.
The Ministry of Health and Populationhad declared that it has no authority on the unlicensed private pest control companies, so they are considered a major danger to the communitythrough many malpractices in the preparation,method of application, dosage,storage and disposal of insecticide.
A very high percentage(95.5%) of the 401 participants of present study, had insects inside their houses or in their neighborhood. The majority of them(86.9%) use insecticide to get rid of insects inside their houses. About two thirds (62.1%) of those using insecticide suggested that the possible reason for presence of insects in their neighborhoods was the presence of a nearby dump place. Moreover, 285(71.1%) inhabitants said there were rats in their neighborhoods.
Only 27(6.7%) of the informants hired private vector control companies to get rid of insects. More than half (63%) of those who hired private pest control companies were not satisfied by the service provided. Furthermore, the overall study population was significantly unsatisfied by the role of the governmental vector control administrations.
The workshops of the study included lectures given by professors of HIPH, Alexandria University and specialists in the field about arthropods of medical importance, safety measures during handling, storage and application of pesticides, vector control equipment and concept of IVM. As well as problem solving at the end of each workshop.
Out of the total 40 vector control personnel who attended the three workshops, 7 (17.5%) were agriculture engineers, 30 (75%) were health supervisors and 3 (7.5%) were vector control technicians. Although, all the 40 workers had enrolled in other training programs before, about two thirds of them (65%) showed poor knowledge.
The result of the post test showed statistically significant increase in their knowledge. As those who had good score significantly increased from (7.5%) pretest to be (42.5%) post test, and those who had poor score significantly decreased from (65%) to become (12.5%) only.