Bats are wildlife and distribute globally. In Thailand, there are hundreds of bat species in different locations within four regions. However, few motivations and influences for having contact with bats have been documented. This sequential qualitative study was conducted in ten provinces representing the four regions of Thailand from September 2016 to June 2017. The study was designed to obtain information on villagers' attitudes, perceptions, beliefs and cultural contexts in relation to bats. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 305 respondents. Of these respondents, 142 (46.6%) reported coming into contact with bats through various activities, such as hunting, eating, cooking, collecting bat guano, cleaning bat feces, and finding carcasses in houses and communities. Villagers called bats by different names in different regions. They reported having been in contact with bats in different ways based on occupations, bat species, bat habitats, attitudes, perceptions, beliefs toward bats, and cultural contexts. Villagers in the northern and northeastern regions reported having regularly eaten bats. In contrast, the respondents in the central region did not eat bats due to local norms, religious beliefs, and regulations. By ethnicity, the Blu and Thai Dum groups reported coming into contact with and eating bats more often than the Thais. Our results provide evidence-based information on the human-bat interface in different regions in Thailand. The results of this qualitative study could be useful for strategic planning of proper education and interventions for bat conservation, bat contact behavior, and risk of bat-borne diseases among villagers in the future.

No abstract

Background Reactive case detection (RACD) or testing and treatment of close contacts of recent malaria cases, is commonly practiced in settings approaching malaria elimination, but standard diagnostics have limited sensitivity to detect low level infections. Reactive drug administration (RDA), or presumptive treatment without testing, is an alternative approach, but better understanding regarding community acceptability and operational feasibility are needed. Methods A qualitative study was conducted as part of a two-arm cluster randomized-controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of RDA targeting high-risk villages and forest workers for reducing Plasmodium vivax and P. falciparum malaria in Thailand. Key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted virtually among key public health staff, village health volunteers (VHVs), and household members that implemented or received RDA activities. Transcriptions were reviewed, coded, and managed manually using Dedoose qualitative data analysis software, then underwent qualitative content analysis to identify key themes. Results RDA was well accepted by household members and public health staff that implemented it. RDA participation was driven by fear of contracting malaria, eagerness to receive protection provided by malaria medicines, and the increased access to health care. Concerns were raised about the safety of taking malaria medicines without having an illness, particularly if underlying health conditions existed. Health promotion hospital (HPH) staff implementing RDA noted its operational feasibility, but highlighted difficulty in traveling to remote areas, and requested additional travel resources and hiring more VHVs. Other challenges were highlighted including the need for additional training for VHVs on malaria activities and the inability of HPH staff to conduct RDA due to other health priorities (e.g., Covid-19). More training and practice for VHVs were noted as ways to improve implementation of RDA. Conclusions To maximize uptake of RDA, regular education and sensitization campaigns in collaboration with village leaders on the purpose and rationale of RDA will be critical. To alleviate safety concerns and increase participant safety, a rigorous pharmacovigilance program will be important. To accelerate uptake of RDA, trust between HPH staff and VHVs and the communities they serve must continue to be strengthened to ensure acceptance of the intervention. Trial registration This study was approved by the Committee on Human Research at the University of California San Francisco (19–28,060) and the local Ethics Committee for Research in Human Subjects at Tak Provincial Health office (009/63) and Kanchanaburi Provincial health office (Kor Chor 0032.002/2185). Local authorities and health officers in the provinces, districts, and villages agreed upon and coordinated the implementation of the study. All methods in this study were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.