Malaria journal · 2024
Willingness to pay for a mosquito bite prevention 'forest pack' in Cambodia: results of a discrete choice experiment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yukich Joshua, Doum Dyna, McIver David J, Richardson Jason H, Sovannanoroth Siv, Lobo Neil F, Tatarsky Allison
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Progress towards malaria elimination in the Greater Mekong Subregion has left much of the residual malaria transmission concentrated among forest-exposed populations for whom traditional domicile focused malaria vector control is unlikely to be effective. New tools to protect these populations from vector biting outdoors are needed.
METHODS: Alongside implementation research on the deployment of a "forest pack" consisting of a volatile pyrethroid (transfluthrin)-based spatial repellent (VPSR), a picaridin-based topical repellent and etofenprox treatment of clothing, an assessment was made of participant willingness to pay for the forest packs and variants of the packs using a discrete choice experiment.
RESULTS: Participants showed willingness to pay for forest packs consistent with full-cost recovery for VPSR devices. The inclusion of a full malaria season's worth of VPSR devices increased the willingness to pay for a forest pack by 15% (p = 0.061). At a price of approximately 10 USD, approximately 50% of participants were willing to pay for a forest pack which included a full season's worth of VPSR.
CONCLUSION: Forest packs which include VPSR are likely to be acceptable to the target forest-exposed populations, and those which include VPSR products may even have potential for commercial sales or some cost-recovery.
METHODS: Alongside implementation research on the deployment of a "forest pack" consisting of a volatile pyrethroid (transfluthrin)-based spatial repellent (VPSR), a picaridin-based topical repellent and etofenprox treatment of clothing, an assessment was made of participant willingness to pay for the forest packs and variants of the packs using a discrete choice experiment.
RESULTS: Participants showed willingness to pay for forest packs consistent with full-cost recovery for VPSR devices. The inclusion of a full malaria season's worth of VPSR devices increased the willingness to pay for a forest pack by 15% (p = 0.061). At a price of approximately 10 USD, approximately 50% of participants were willing to pay for a forest pack which included a full season's worth of VPSR.
CONCLUSION: Forest packs which include VPSR are likely to be acceptable to the target forest-exposed populations, and those which include VPSR products may even have potential for commercial sales or some cost-recovery.