Effectiveness of deltamethrin-impregnated dog collars on the incidence of canine infection by Leishmania infantum: A large scale intervention study in an endemic area in Brazil

To reduce morbidity and mortality caused by visceral leishmaniasis (VL), the Brazilian Visceral Leishmaniasis Control and Surveillance Program promotes the diagnosis and treatment of cases, vector control, euthanasia of seropositive dogs, and health education. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these measures is questionable as they lead to little reduction in the transmission of the disease. Thus, the effectiveness of strategies such as insecticide-impregnated collars, spot-on insecticides, and immunization of dogs should be assessed. Herein, we evaluated the effectiveness of deltamethrin-impregnated collars on reducing the incidence of Leishmania infantum infection in dogs living in an endemic area of VL. An intervention study was conducted and a total 5,850 dogs were analyzed in baseline. Of these 3,742 seronegative dogs were divided into two groups: collared and uncollared (control). Dogs were followed for 12 months and three interventions were performed. The Cox regression model was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the collar. All analyzes were performed by Intention-to-treat and per-protocol. By intention-to-treat, the incidence rates of L. infantum infection were 7.5 and 7.9 in the collar group, and 6.5 and 13.2 per 1,000 dogs-months in the control group after 6 and 12 months, respectively. In the per-protocol analysis, the incidence rates in the control group were similar to those observed in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the collar group, the incidence rate was 5.1/1,000 dogs-months after 6 and 12 months. The effectiveness by intention-to-treat after adjustment by the multivariate Cox model was 48%. In the analysis per-protocol, the effectiveness increased to 63%. Although collar use was effective when it was evaluated by intention-to-treat, higher effectiveness was found in the per-protocol analysis after one year of follow-up. The data emphasize the importance of the uninterrupted use of deltamethrin-impregnated collars to increase protection against canine VL.


Introduction
Background 2 Scientific background and explanation of rationale Theories used in designing behavioral interventions

Methods
Participants 3 Eligibility criteria for participants, including criteria at different levels in recruitment/sampling plan (e.g., cities, clinics, subjects) Method of recruitment (e.g., referral, self-selection), including the sampling method if a systematic sampling plan was implemented Recruitment setting Settings and locations where the data were collected Interventions 4 Details of the interventions intended for each study condition and how and when they were actually administered, specifically including: Unit of assignment (the unit being assigned to study condition, e.g., individual, group, community) Method used to assign units to study conditions, including details of any restriction (e.g., blocking, stratification, minimization) Inclusion of aspects employed to help minimize potential bias induced due to non-randomization (e.g., matching)  9 8,9 8,9 8,9 8,9 8,9 N Whether or not participants, those administering the interventions, and those assessing the outcomes were blinded to study condition assignment; if so, statement regarding how the blinding was accomplished and how it was assessed.
Unit of Analysis 10 Description of the smallest unit that is being analyzed to assess intervention effects (e.g., individual, group, or community) If the unit of analysis differs from the unit of assignment, the analytical method used to account for this (e.g., adjusting the standard error estimates by the design effect or using multilevel analysis) Statistical Methods

11
Statistical methods used to compare study groups for primary methods outcome(s), including complex methods of correlated data Statistical methods used for additional analyses, such as a subgroup analyses and adjusted analysis Methods for imputing missing data, if used Statistical software or programs used

Participant flow 12
Flow of participants through each stage of the study: enrollment, assignment, allocation, and intervention exposure, follow-up, analysis (a diagram is strongly recommended) o Enrollment: the numbers of participants screened for eligibility, found to be eligible or not eligible, declined to be enrolled, and enrolled in the study o Assignment: the numbers of participants assigned to a study condition o Allocation and intervention exposure: the number of participants assigned to each study condition and the number of participants who received each intervention o Follow-up: the number of participants who completed the followup or did not complete the follow-up (i.e., lost to follow-up), by study condition

TREND Statement Checklist
Numbers analyzed 16 Number of participants (denominator) included in each analysis for each study condition, particularly when the denominators change for different outcomes; statement of the results in absolute numbers when feasible Indication of whether the analysis strategy was "intention to treat" or, if not, description of how non-compliers were treated in the analyses Outcomes and estimation 17 For each primary and secondary outcome, a summary of results for each estimation study condition, and the estimated effect size and a confidence interval to indicate the precision Inclusion of null and negative findings Inclusion of results from testing pre-specified causal pathways through which the intervention was intended to operate, if any Ancillary analyses 18 Summary of other analyses performed, including subgroup or restricted analyses, indicating which are pre-specified or exploratory Adverse events 19 Summary of all important adverse events or unintended effects in each study condition (including summary measures, effect size estimates, and confidence intervals)

Interpretation 20
Interpretation of the results, taking into account study hypotheses, sources of potential bias, imprecision of measures, multiplicative analyses, and other limitations or weaknesses of the study Discussion of results taking into account the mechanism by which the intervention was intended to work (causal pathways) or alternative mechanisms or explanations Discussion of the success of and barriers to implementing the intervention, fidelity of implementation Discussion of research, programmatic, or policy implications Generalizability 21 Generalizability (external validity) of the trial findings, taking into account the study population, the characteristics of the intervention, length of follow-up, incentives, compliance rates, specific sites/settings involved in the study, and other contextual issues Overall Evidence

22
General interpretation of the results in the context of current evidence and current theory