ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective: To characterize approach methods for intradomiciliary contacts (IdC) of leprosy cases resident in Northern Brazil, during 2001-2012. Method: A cross-sectional and descriptive study in the state of Rondônia. Included IdC of leprosy cases diagnosed/reported in SINAN-Ministry of Health (MS), 2001-2012. A semi-structured instrument was applied to the IdCs, with six interventions: complete dermatological examination; complete neurological examination; BCG vaccination; instructions for return to the health unit; BCG guidance; and guidance to mobilize other contacts. Results: From a total of 459 IdCs included, failure to perform the dermatological examination was reported by 191 people (41.6%) and the neurological examination, by 252 (54.9%); 138 (30.1%) did not have BCG indicated and 122 (26.6%) did not receive guidelines; 257 (56.0%) were not advised to return for a new evaluation/follow-up and 186 (40.5%) were not asked to mobilize other contacts. Conclusion: Despite the favorable indicators of IdC examination coverage in the state, the evaluation process presents patterns that indicate operational quality failures.
RESUMEN Objetivo: Caracterizar normas de abordaje de contactos intradomiciliarias(CId) de casos de lepra residentes en el Norte de Brasil, de 2001-2012. Método: Estudio transversal y descriptivo en el estado de Rondônia. Incluidos CId de casos de lepra diagnosticados/notificados en SINAN-Ministerio de Salud (MS), 2001-2012. Se aplicó instrumento semi estructurado a los CId verificándose 6 intervenciones: examen dermatológico completo; examen neurológico completo; vacunación BCG; orientación para retorno a la unidad de salud; orientación sobre BCG y orientación para movilizar otros contactos. Resultados: Fueron incluidos 459 CId. La no realización del examen dermatológico fue referida por 191 personas (41,6%) y el neurológico, por 252 (54,9%), 138(30,1%) no tuvieron la BCG indicada y 122 (26,6%) no recibieron orientaciones, 257 (56,0%) no fueron orientados a retornar para nueva evaluación/seguimiento y 186 (40,5%) no fueron orientados para movilización de otros contactos. Conclusión: A pesar de los indicadores favorables de cobertura de examen de CId en el estado, el proceso de evaluación presenta normas que indican fallos operacionales de cualidad.
RESUMO Objetivo: Caracterizar padrões de abordagem de contatos intradomiciliares (CId) de casos de hanseníase residentes no Norte do Brasil, de 2001-2012. Método: Estudo transversal e descritivo no estado de Rondônia. Incluídos CId de casos de hanseníase diagnosticados/notificados no SINAN-Ministério da Saúde (MS), 2001-2012. Aplicou-se instrumento semiestruturado aos CId verificando-se seis intervenções: exame dermatológico completo; exame neurológico completo; vacinação BCG; orientação para retorno à unidade de saúde; orientação sobre BCG e orientação para mobilizar outros contatos. Resultados: Foram incluídos 459 CId. A não realização do exame dermatológico foi referida por 191 pessoas (41,6%) e o neurológico, por 252 (54,9%); 138 (30,1%) não tiveram a BCG indicada e 122 (26,6%) não receberam orientações; 257 (56,0%) não foram orientados a retornar para nova avaliação/seguimento e 186 (40,5%) não foram orientados para mobilização de outros contatos. Conclusão: Apesar dos indicadores favoráveis de cobertura de exame de CId no estado, o processo de avaliação apresenta padrões que indicam falhas operacionais de qualidade.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Adolescent , Adult , Patients/psychology , Perception , Population Surveillance/methods , Leprosy/epidemiology , Brazil/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Contact Tracing/methods , Leprosy/psychology , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To characterize approach methods for intradomiciliary contacts (IdC) of leprosy cases resident in Northern Brazil, during 2001-2012. METHOD: A cross-sectional and descriptive study in the state of Rondônia. Included IdC of leprosy cases diagnosed/reported in SINAN-Ministry of Health (MS), 2001-2012. A semi-structured instrument was applied to the IdCs, with six interventions: complete dermatological examination; complete neurological examination; BCG vaccination; instructions for return to the health unit; BCG guidance; and guidance to mobilize other contacts.Results: From a total of 459 IdCs included, failure to perform the dermatological examination was reported by 191 people (41.6%) and the neurological examination, by 252 (54.9%); 138 (30.1%) did not have BCG indicated and 122 (26.6%) did not receive guidelines; 257 (56.0%) were not advised to return for a new evaluation/follow-up and 186 (40.5%) were not asked to mobilize other contacts. CONCLUSION: Despite the favorable indicators of IdC examination coverage in the state, the evaluation process presents patterns that indicate operational quality failures.