Measuring endemicity and burden of leprosy across countries and regions: A systematic review and Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy is a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae, the annual new case detection in 2019 was 202,189 globally. Measuring endemicity levels and burden in leprosy lacks a uniform approach. As a result, the assessment of leprosy endemicity or burden are not comparable over time and across countries and regions. This can make program planning and evaluation difficult. This study aims to identify relevant metrics and methods for measuring and classifying leprosy endemicity and burden at (sub)national level. METHODS: We used a mixed-method approach combining findings from a systematic literature review and a Delphi survey. The literature search was conducted in seven databases, searching for endemicity, burden and leprosy. We reviewed the available evidence on the usage of indicators, classification levels, and scoring methods to measure and classify endemicity and burden. A two round Delphi survey was conducted to ask experts to rank and weigh indicators, classification levels, and scoring methods. RESULTS: The literature review showed variation of indicators, levels, and cut-off values to measure leprosy endemicity and/or burden. The most used indicators for endemicity include new case detection rate (NCDR), new cases among children and new cases with grade 2 disability. For burden these include NCDR, MB cases, and prevalence. The classification levels 'high' and 'low' were most important. It was considered most relevant to use separate scoring methods for endemicity and burden. The scores would be derived by use of multiple indicators. CONCLUSION: There is great variation in the existing method for measuring endemicity and burden across countries and regions. Our findings contribute to establishing a standardized uniform approach to measure and classify leprosy endemicity and burden at (sub)national level, which would allow effective communication and planning of intervention strategies.

Erratum: Psychosocial burden of neglected tropical diseases in eastern Colombia: an explorative qualitative study in persons affected by leprosy, cutaneous leishmaniasis and Chagas disease - ERRATUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/gmh.2021.18.].

Stigma, participation restriction and mental distress in patients affected by leprosy, cutaneous leishmaniasis and Chagas disease: a pilot study in two co-endemic regions of eastern Colombia.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy, cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) and Chagas disease (CD) are neglected tropical diseases with a high psychosocial burden (PSB). These conditions are endemic in Norte de Santander and Arauca in Colombia, but data on the related PSB are scarce. Therefore, we assessed mental distress, participation restriction and stigma among CD, CL and leprosy patients. METHODS: In 2018, 305 leprosy, CD or CL patients were interviewed using a self-report questionnaire to assess mental distress, participation scale for participation restriction and explanatory model interview catalogue (EMIC) for stigma. Descriptive statistics and the significance of median score differences were compared. RESULTS: Fifty percent of CD patients and 49% of leprosy patients exhibited mental distress, percentages which were significantly higher than that of CL (26%). Twenty-seven percent of leprosy patients experienced participation restriction, which was lower for CL (6%) and CD (12%). Median EMIC scores were significantly higher for leprosy patients than for CD (27%) and CL (17%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found high levels of PSB among leprosy, CD and CL patients. Mental distress was highest among CD patients. Participation restriction and stigma were more prevalent in leprosy patients. Rural residence or lower educational status may impact PSB. Further investigation is needed to formulate evidence-based, holistic interventions.

Factors associated with the delay of diagnosis of leprosy in north-eastern Colombia: a quantitative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the average time in months between the beginning of symptoms and the diagnostic confirmation of leprosy by the health system and to investigate factors associated with diagnostic delay. METHODS: A total of 249 patients older than 15 years diagnosed with leprosy between 2011 and 2015, in 20 endemic municipalities of north-eastern Colombia, provided informed consent and were interviewed face-to-face. Clinical histories from health centres or hospitals where study participants were treated for leprosy were also reviewed. RESULTS: The mean delay in diagnosis of leprosy was 33.5 months. About 14.9% of patients showed a visible deformity or damage (disability grade 2, DG2) at the time of diagnosis. In multivariable regression analysis, five or more consultancies required to confirm the diagnosis and not seeking care immediately after noticing first symptoms were associated with longer diagnostic delay. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a significant delay in diagnosis of leprosy in north-eastern Colombia, which might explain the continuously high rate of DG2 among new cases being notified in the country. Both patient- and health system-related factors were associated with longer diagnostic delay. Interventions to increase awareness of disease among the general population and timely referral to a specialised health professional are urgently needed in our study setting.

Trends and patterns in leprosy in nine states of the Republic of the Sudan 7 years after the introduction of routine contact screening.

Background: This paper analyzes the trends of key indicators reflecting the epidemiological situation of leprosy in nine different states of the Republic of the Sudan after the introduction of a systematic contact screening in 2010. Methods: The routinely assessed data from the leprosy control program from 2010 to 2016 were analyzed. Results: Despite, intense contact screening, the overall number of new cases detected showed a decreasing trend. The female:male ratio among new cases was constantly low. The overall average number of contacts needed to screen in order to detect a new case among contacts was 64. However, this number varied significantly in the nine states under investigation, with the best yield being observed in the state with the lowest case detection rate. Conclusions: The total number of new cases of leprosy in nine states of the Republic of the Sudan has shown declining tendencies since 2010. Our data are not suggestive of a significant impact of contact screening on the trends of leprosy key indicators. Overall, contact screening proved to be efficient in most states, including those that exhibited very low annual new case detection rates (ANCDRs). Sensitization of personnel undergoing training and measures improving access of females to leprosy services are urgently needed.