Delivering ‘tiny targets’ in a remote region of southern Chad: a cost analysis of tsetse control in the Mandoul sleeping sickness focus

• Main Authors: Jean-Baptiste Rayaisse, Fabrice Courtin, Mahamat Hisséne Mahamat, Mahamat Chérif, Wilfrid Yoni, Nadmba M. O. Gadjibet, Mallaye Peka, Philippe Solano, Steve J. Torr, Alexandra P. M. Shaw
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020-08-01
• Series: Parasites & Vectors
• Subjects: Cost; Tsetse control; Tiny targets; Human African trypanosomiasis; Chad; Mandoul
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13071-020-04286-w

Abstract Background Since 2012, the World Health Organisation and the countries affected by the Gambian form of human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) have been committed to eliminating the disease, primarily through active case-finding and treatment. To interrupt transmission of Trypanosoma brucei gambiense and move more rapidly towards elimination, it was decided to add vector control using ‘tiny targets’. Chad’s Mandoul HAT focus extends over 840 km2, with a human population of 39,000 as well as 14,000 cattle and 3000 pigs. Some 2700 tiny targets were deployed annually from 2014 onwards. Methods A protocol was developed for the routine collection of tsetse control costs during all field missions. This was implemented throughout 2015 and 2016, and combined with the recorded costs of the preliminary survey and sensitisation activities. The objective was to calculate the full costs at local prices in Chad. Costs were adjusted to remove research components and to ensure that items outside the project budget lines were included, such as administrative overheads and a share of staff salaries. Results Targets were deployed at about 60 per linear km of riverine tsetse habitat. The average annual cost of the operation was USD 56,113, working out at USD 66.8 per km2 protected and USD 1.4 per person protected. Of this, 12.8% was an annual share of the initial tsetse survey, 40.6% for regular tsetse monitoring undertaken three times a year, 36.8% for target deployment and checking and 9.8% for sensitisation of local populations. Targets accounted for 8.3% of the cost, and the cost of delivering a target was USD 19.0 per target deployed. Conclusions This study has confirmed that tiny targets provide a consistently low cost option for controlling tsetse in gambiense HAT foci. Although the study area is remote with a tsetse habitat characterised by wide river marshes, the costs were similar to those of tiny target work in Uganda, with some differences, in particular a higher cost per target delivered. As was the case in Uganda, the cost was between a quarter and a third that of historical target operations using full size targets or traps.