Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros


Bases de datos
Asunto principal
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Trop Med Infect Dis ; 9(3)2024 Feb 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38535876

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite all of the efforts, leprosy continues to affect hundreds of thousands of people every year, including children, showing the ongoing transmission of the disease within the population. The transmission of leprosy can be interrupted through an integrated approach that includes active case-finding, contact tracing and capacity building of health workers. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used to assess the knowledge, attitudes and skills of health workers in the screening and diagnosis of leprosy. One hundred and eighty-one and eighty-eight health care workers participated in the pre-and post-assessment surveys, respectively. Data were collected through interviews and an observational checklist. Frequency tables and graphs were used to describe the study variables, and statistical significance between pre- and post-assessment surveys was declared at p-value < 0.5. RESULT: The percentages of healthcare workers with good knowledge, positive attitudes and skills were 61.2%, 55.6% and 51.7% in the pre-assessment survey and 77.3%, 56.3% and 75.0%, respectively, in the post-assessment survey. There was a significant improvement in the knowledge and skill scores of participants in the post-assessment survey (p < 0.01). During the campaign, 3780 index contacts were screened; 570 (15.1%) were diagnosed with skin diseases, and 17 new leprosy cases were diagnosed (case detection rate of 45 per 10,000 contacts). CONCLUSION: Training improved the knowledge and skills of healthcare workers, and a large number of skin diseases were detected through mass screening and active case findings. Providing training for frontline healthcare workers contributed to the detection of more cases and facilitated early detection of leprosy cases.

2.
Infect Dis Poverty ; 12(1): 111, 2023 Dec 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38053215

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Nepal has achieved and sustained the elimination of leprosy as a public health problem since 2009, but 17 districts and 3 provinces with 41% (10,907,128) of Nepal's population have yet to eliminate the disease. Pediatric cases and grade-2 disabilities (G2D) indicate recent transmission and late diagnosis, respectively, which necessitate active and early case detection. This operational research was performed to identify approaches best suited for early case detection, determine community-based leprosy epidemiology, and identify hidden leprosy cases early and respond with prompt treatment. METHODS: Active case detection was undertaken in two Nepali provinces with the greatest burden of leprosy, Madhesh Province (40% national cases) and Lumbini Province (18%) and at-risk prison populations in Madhesh, Lumbini and Bagmati provinces. Case detection was performed by (1) house-to-house visits among vulnerable populations (n = 26,469); (2) contact examination and tracing (n = 7608); in Madhesh and Lumbini Provinces and, (3) screening prison populations (n = 4428) in Madhesh, Lumbini and Bagmati Provinces of Nepal. Per case direct medical and non-medical costs for each approach were calculated. RESULTS: New case detection rates were highest for contact tracing (250), followed by house-to-house visits (102) and prison screening (45) per 100,000 population screened. However, the cost per case identified was cheapest for house-to-house visits [Nepalese rupee (NPR) 76,500/case], followed by contact tracing (NPR 90,286/case) and prison screening (NPR 298,300/case). House-to-house and contact tracing case paucibacillary/multibacillary (PB:MB) ratios were 59:41 and 68:32; female/male ratios 63:37 and 57:43; pediatric cases 11% in both approaches; and grade-2 disabilities (G2D) 11% and 5%, respectively. Developing leprosy was not significantly different among household and neighbor contacts [odds ratios (OR) = 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24-5.85] and for contacts of MB versus PB cases (OR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.26-2.0). Attack rates were not significantly different among household contacts of MB cases (0.32%, 95% CI 0.07-0.94%) and PB cases (0.13%, 95% CI 0.03-0.73) (χ2 = 0.07, df = 1, P = 0.9) and neighbor contacts of MB cases (0.23%, 0.1-0.46) and PB cases (0.48%, 0.19-0.98) (χ2 = 0.8, df = 1, P = 0.7). BCG vaccination with scar presence had a significant protective effect against leprosy (OR = 0.42, 0.22-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: The most effective case identification approach here is contact tracing, followed by house-to-house visits in vulnerable populations and screening in prisons, although house-to-house visits are cheaper. The findings suggest that hidden cases, recent transmission, and late diagnosis in the community exist and highlight the importance of early case detection.


Asunto(s)
Lepra , Niño , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Nepal/epidemiología , Lepra/diagnóstico , Lepra/epidemiología , Lepra/prevención & control , Trazado de Contacto , Factores de Riesgo , Diagnóstico Precoz
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA