The effect of conditional cash transfers on the control of neglected tropical disease: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are diseases of poverty and affect 1·5 billion people globally. Conditional cash transfer (CCTs) programmes alleviate poverty in many countries, potentially contributing to improved NTD outcomes. This systematic review examines the relationship between CCTs and screening, incidence, or treatment outcomes of NTDs. METHODS: In this systematic review we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Lilacs, EconLit, Global Health, and grey literature websites on Sept 17, 2020, with no date or language restrictions. Controlled quantitative studies including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating CCT interventions in low-income and middle-income countries were included. Any outcome measures related to WHO's 20 diseases classified as NTDs were included. Studies from high-income countries were excluded. Two authors (AA and TH) extracted data from published studies and appraised risk of biases using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias 2 tools. Results were analysed narratively. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020202480. FINDINGS: From the search, 5165 records were identified; of these, 11 studies were eligible for inclusion covering four CCTs in Brazil, the Philippines, Mexico, and Zambia. Most studies were either RCTs or quasi-experimental studies and ten were assessed to be of moderate quality. Seven studies reported improved NTD outcomes associated with CCTs, in particular, reduced incidence of leprosy and increased uptake of deworming treatments. There was some evidence of greater benefit of CCTS in lower socioeconomic groups but subgroup analysis was scarce. Methodological weaknesses include self-reported outcomes, missing data, improper randomisation, and differences between CCT and comparator populations in observational studies. The available evidence is currently limited, covering a small proportion of CCTs and NTDs. INTERPRETATION: CCTs can be associated with improved NTD outcomes, and could be driven by both improvements in living standards from cash benefits and direct health effects from conditionalities related to health-care use. This evidence adds to the knowledge of health-improving effects from CCTs in poor and vulnerable populations. FUNDING: None.

Estimating underreporting of leprosy in Brazil using a Bayesian approach.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy remains concentrated among the poorest communities in low-and middle-income countries and it is one of the primary infectious causes of disability. Although there have been increasing advances in leprosy surveillance worldwide, leprosy underreporting is still common and can hinder decision-making regarding the distribution of financial and health resources and thereby limit the effectiveness of interventions. In this study, we estimated the proportion of unreported cases of leprosy in Brazilian microregions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Using data collected between 2007 to 2015 from each of the 557 Brazilian microregions, we applied a Bayesian hierarchical model that used the presence of grade 2 leprosy-related physical disabilities as a direct indicator of delayed diagnosis and a proxy for the effectiveness of local leprosy surveillance program. We also analyzed some relevant factors that influence spatial variability in the observed mean incidence rate in the Brazilian microregions, highlighting the importance of socioeconomic factors and how they affect the levels of underreporting. We corrected leprosy incidence rates for each Brazilian microregion and estimated that, on average, 33,252 (9.6%) new leprosy cases went unreported in the country between 2007 to 2015, with this proportion varying from 8.4% to 14.1% across the Brazilian States. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The magnitude and distribution of leprosy underreporting were adequately explained by a model using Grade 2 disability as a marker for the ability of the system to detect new missing cases. The percentage of missed cases was significant, and efforts are warranted to improve leprosy case detection. Our estimates in Brazilian microregions can be used to guide effective interventions, efficient resource allocation, and target actions to mitigate transmission.

Conditional Cash Transfer Program and Leprosy Incidence: Analysis of 12.9 Million Families From the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort.

Leprosy is a neglected tropical disease predominately affecting poor and marginalized populations. To test the hypothesis that poverty-alleviating policies might be associated with reduced leprosy incidence, we evaluated the association between the Brazilian Bolsa Familia (BFP) conditional cash transfer program and new leprosy case detection using linked records from 12,949,730 families in the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort (2007-2014). After propensity score matching BFP beneficiary to nonbeneficiary families, we used Mantel-Haenszel tests and Poisson regressions to estimate incidence rate ratios for new leprosy case detection and secondary endpoints related to operational classification and leprosy-associated disabilities at diagnosis. Overall, cumulative leprosy incidence was 17.4/100,000 person-years at risk (95% CI: 17.1, 17.7) and markedly higher in "priority" (high-burden) versus "nonpriority" (low-burden) municipalities (22.8/100,000 person-years at risk, 95% confidence interval (CI): 22.2, 23.3, compared with 14.3/100,000 person-years at risk, 95% CI: 14.0, 14.7). After matching, BFP participation was not associated with leprosy incidence overall (incidence rate ratio (IRR)Poisson = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.90, 1.04) but was associated with lower leprosy incidence when restricted to families living in high-burden municipalities (IRRPoisson = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77, 0.96). In high-burden municipalities, the association was particularly pronounced for paucibacillary cases (IRRPoisson = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.98) and cases with leprosy-associated disabilities (IRRPoisson = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.97). These findings provide policy-relevant evidence that social policies might contribute to ongoing leprosy control efforts in high-burden communities.

Effect of a conditional cash transfer programme on leprosy treatment adherence and cure in patients from the nationwide 100 Million Brazilian Cohort: a quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Indirect financial costs and barriers to health-care access might contribute to leprosy treatment non-adherence. We estimated the association of the Brazilian conditional cash transfer programme, the Programa Bolsa Família (PBF), on leprosy treatment adherence and cure in patients in Brazil. METHODS: In this quasi-experimental study, we linked baseline demographic and socioeconomic information for individuals who entered the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort between Jan 1, 2007, and Dec 31, 2014, with the PBF payroll database and the Information System for Notifiable Diseases, which includes nationwide leprosy registries. Individuals were eligible for inclusion if they had a household member older than 15 years and had not received PBF aid or been diagnosed with leprosy before entering the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort; they were excluded if they were partial receivers of PBF benefits, had missing data, or had a monthly per-capita income greater than BRL200 (US$50). Individuals who were PBF beneficiaries before leprosy diagnosis were matched to those who were not beneficiaries through propensity-score matching (1:1) with replacement on the basis of baseline covariates, including sex, age, race or ethnicity, education, work, income, place of residence, and household characteristics. We used logistic regression to assess the average treatment effect on the treated of receipt of PBF benefits on leprosy treatment adherence (six or more multidrug therapy doses for paucibacillary cases or 12 or more doses for multibacillary cases) and cure in individuals of all ages. We stratified our analysis according to operational disease classification (paucibacillary or multibacillary). We also did a subgroup analysis of paediatric leprosy restricted to children aged up to 15 years. FINDINGS: We included 11 456 new leprosy cases, of whom 8750 (76·3%) had received PBF before diagnosis and 2706 (23·6%) had not. Overall, 9508 (83·0%) patients adhered to treatment and 10 077 (88·0%) were cured. After propensity score matching, receiving PBF before diagnosis was associated with adherence to treatment (OR 1·22, 95% CI 1·01-1·48) and cure (1·26, 1·01-1·58). PBF receipt did not significantly improve treatment adherence (1·37, 0·98-1·91) or cure (1·12, 0·75-1·67) in patients with paucibacillary leprosy. For patients with multibacillary disease, PBF beneficiaries had better treatment adherence (1·37, 1·08-1·74) and cure (1·43, 1·09-1·90) than non-beneficiaries. In the propensity score-matched analysis in 2654 children younger than 15 years with leprosy, PBF exposure was not associated with leprosy treatment adherence (1·55, 0·89-2·68) or cure (1·57, 0·83-2·97). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that being a beneficiary of the PBF, which facilitates cash transfers and improved access to health care, is associated with greater leprosy multidrug therapy adherence and cure in multibacillary cases. These results are especially relevant for patients with multibacillary disease, who are treated for a longer period and have lower cure rates than those with paucibacillary disease. FUNDING: CONFAP/ESRC/MRC/BBSRC/CNPq/FAPDF-Doenças Negligenciadas, the UK Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior-Brazil (CAPES).