Skip to content
BugRepellent.Guide

Study summary

Field evaluation of an area repellent system (Thermacell) against Phlebotomus papatasi and Ochlerotatus caspius in Sanliurfa Province, Turkey

Alten B, Caglar SS, Simsek FM, Kaynas S, Perich MJ

Read the original paper
Study type
Field Trial
Year
2003
Published in
Journal of Medical Entomology (2003), PMID 14765672
Evidence strength
Well-supported evidence

Summary

This was an outdoor field trial of the Thermacell area repellent, the butane-heated device that warms a mat holding allethrin so it drifts into the surrounding air. Researchers ran it in a village in Sanliurfa Province in southeastern Turkey and measured how much it cut biting from two different pests at once: Phlebotomus papatasi, a sand fly that spreads leishmaniasis, and Ochlerotatus caspius, a floodwater mosquito. Volunteers acted as bite collectors so the team could compare landing and biting rates with the device running versus without it.

Key findings

The device delivered strong protection against both pests. Reductions in sand fly biting in the treated groups ranged from about 87.5 to 97.7 percent, averaging roughly 92 percent, and reductions in mosquito biting ranged from about 90.2 to 97.4 percent, averaging roughly 93 percent. Those reductions stayed above 90 percent across the multi-hour assessment window, with the strongest and most statistically clear protection in the first few hours after the device was switched on. For a real buyer, this is solid evidence that a heat-powered allethrin emanator can create a usefully bug-thinned zone for a stationary group, for example people sitting around a patio or campsite for an evening.

Limitations

This was a public-health field study of a stationary device, so the numbers describe a fixed treated area, not a person walking around. Protection was measured over a few hours, and it depends on the device staying lit and on relatively calm conditions, since allethrin drifting in the air is easily dispersed by wind. Allethrin is also a shorter-acting, less potent airborne active than the newer metofluthrin, and the trial covered specific sand fly and mosquito species in one region, so results with different local mosquitoes could vary.

Related on this site

Read the original paper and see its figures ↗