Social Distance in COVID-19: Drawing the line between protective behavior and stigma manifestation.

Social stigma has long been defined by Ervin Goffman as an attribute that it is deeply discrediting and reduces the individual who bears it from a whole and usual person to a tarnished one, unfit to be included into the mainstream society.1 As stigma spans time and space and has been documented in other social species such as ants and chimpanzees, one might argue for its adaptive potential. Neuberg and colleagues2 have suggested that humans generate stigmas against threats to effective group functioning, with a notable case being infectious diseases. A similar explanation has been put forward by other researchers who consider stigma to have evolved from disease-avoidance mechanisms.3 Hence, it is not surprising that tuberculosis, HIV and leprosy have been surrounded by stigma and discrimination.4,5 More recently, people who had survived the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak tackled social exclusion and unemployment after returning to their neighborhoods.6 Nowadays, the global community faces an unprecedented challenge of grappling with the COVID-19 pandemic. From the very outset, social distance measures were introduced in order to contain the spread of the virus, ranging from maintaining 1.5 meters physical distance to strict lockdowns. However, this may easily escalate into stigmatizing and discriminatory behaviours (desired social distance is a proxy of discrimination) against people who have suffered from COVID-19, their relatives and their caregivers, with the United Nations stating that "fear, rumours and stigma" are the key challenges surrounding COVID-19.7 Apart from the psychological distress experienced by the stigmatized individuals, due to anticipated stigma people might start concealing their illness, avoid or delay seeking medical advice or testing until they are seriously ill and be reluctant to collaborate with authorities on tracing contacts. Therefore, timely identifying stigma and addressing it is an integral part of an effective health response to the ongoing pandemic. In spite of its importance, research on COVID-19 related stigma is scarce. From the perspective of the stigmatized individuals, a study in China8 demonstrated that COVID-19 survivors faced heightened levels of overall stigma, social rejection, financial insecurity, internalized shame and social isolation, compared to healthy controls. From the perspective of the general population, a study in US9 substantiated low levels of anticipated stigma and stereotype endorsement; however, respondents who anticipated greater stigma were less likely to seek a COVID-19 test. It is therefore clear that the international literature is still on its infancy with respect to COVID-19 related stigma. In this context, in the First Department of Psychiatry, University of Athens, we conducted a survey on public attitudes to COVID-19 and to mental disorders. The study would inform the design and implementation of anti-stigma initiatives, funded by the Regional Governor of Attica. As physical distancing and social distancing are interwoven, with some researchers and practitioners using the terms interchangeably, and social distancing is also a protective public health measure against COVID-19, we enquired about attitudes and desired social distance from people who had recovered from COVID-19. Nonetheless, it merits noting that evidence from other diseases indicates that stigma may persist even after recovery.10 Moreover, rather than describing public attitudes overall, we were more interested in investigating where COVID-19 related stigma stands as compared to the most stigmatizing health condition to date, i.e., severe mental illness.11 Interestingly enough, which elements of severe mental illness render it the most stigmatized as compared to other conditions is still speculative: is it the fear of madness? the severity and the type of symptoms? the purported incurability or its chronicity? In our study, evidence from a convenience sample of 370 residents of Attica indicates that the general population holds more negative attitudes towards people who have recovered from COVID-19 than towards people with mental disorders. Nonetheless, respondents reported lower levels of desired social distance from recovered COVID-19 cases as compared to mental illness cases in social interactions of graded intimacy; however, the difference between the two groups was found to decrease as the level of intimacy decreased as well. In other words, desired social distance from COVID-19 cases is more easily discernible in transient social encounters, like talking to a stranger. It is therefore clear that social distance is still a public health protective measure rather than a stigma manifestation. For social encounters of greater intimacy, usually a sign of discriminatory behaviours, having recovered from COVID-19 is not a deterrent to interaction. Findings can be explained by the acute (non-chronic) nature of the disease, both in terms of symptoms as well as the 10-day period since symptom onset for being contagious. Nonetheless, with emerging evidence substantiating the notion of long COVID-19, defined as the persistence of symptoms for 3 weeks after infection,12 this might quickly change. Moreover, with many public health protective measures available, such as the use of mask, diagnostic testing and vaccination, people who become infected are more likely to be blamed for contracting the disease and thus deemed responsible for this, in line with the Attribution Theory.13 Specifically, overarching evidence from stigma research in many diseases/conditions indicates that when an illness or a social condition, such as economic disadvantage, is attributed to internal causes, as compared to external, lay people are more likely to hold stigmatizing attitudes.14-16 Therefore, as attitudes towards COVID-19 are worse compared to those towards people with mental illness, if tailored anti-stigma action is not undertaken, it is only a matter of time for prejudices to evolve into discriminatory behaviours, with devastating consequences on both the individuals and the course of the pandemic. Concomitantly, as severe mental illness is neither life threatening nor contagious, but COVID-19 is, it is interesting to explore how stigma is related to evolutionary mechanisms favouring adaptability and survival as well as which elements are the drivers of stigma development and establishment. Therefore, comparing and contrasting the stigma surrounding these conditions may shed light on the underpinnings of social stigma and facilitate effective interventions to reduce it and eventually eliminate it.

Investigating barriers and challenges to the integrated management of neglected tropical skin diseases in an endemic setting in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of experience in and evidence for cost-effective integrated community-based management of skin neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). The objective of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitude and care-seeking practices including self-care with a view to introducing appropriate community-based interventions for skin NTDs in an endemic setting in Southern Nigeria. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This exploratory study adopted a mixed-methods design consisting of cross-sectional surveys of community members and health workers using interviewer-administered questionnaires; and focus group discussions (FGDs) with community members, health care workers and patients with NTDs in Anambra State, Nigeria. The survey was completed by 353 community members (61.8% female) and 15 health care workers (100.0% female). A total of 52 individuals participated in six FGDs. Of the community members, 236 (66.9%) had heard or seen a case of leprosy; 324 (91.8%) and 131 (37.5%) had heard or seen a case of Buruli ulcer and lymphatic filariasis, respectively. Again, 213 (60.3%) of the respondents reported that the diseases were caused by witchcraft or curse. As regards prevention, 241 (68.3%) suggested avoiding handshake with affected persons. Up to 223 (63.2%) of respondents strongly agreed to the seriousness of skin NTDs in their community. Meanwhile, 272 (77.1%) of the respondents believed that the transmission of these skin NTDs can be prevented. Furthermore, 324 (91.7%) desired active community engagement for control of skin NTDs. Regarding community care seeking practices, 197 (55.8%) would first visit the health centre/hospital, followed by 91 (25.8%) traditional healer/herbalist and 35 (9.9%) pharmacy/patent medicine vendor if they develop a skin NTD. Overall, 332 (94.1%) of respondents expressed interest in being taught self-care practices for skin NTDs. Out of 15 healthcare workers, 13 (86.7%) were able to correctly diagnose two of these skin NTDs and 10 (66.7%) would encourage patients to practice self-care. Prominent themes in the FGDs were belief in witchcraft and herbal remedies; as well as the occurrence of physical, social and economic distress. CONCLUSIONS: Our study helped quantify the information gaps that need to be addressed in order to create demand for integrated skin NTDs services in an endemic setting in Nigeria. Individual, structural and socioeconomic challenges to access and delivery of services were identified. Community and health care workers' empowerment and engagement through outreach and regular training, respectively may alleviate these challenges.

Diagnostics for COVID-19: A case for field-deployable, rapid molecular tests for community surveillance.

Across the globe, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic is causing distress with governments doing everything in their power to contain the spread of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) to prevent morbidity and mortality. Actions are being implemented to keep health care systems from being overstretched and to curb the outbreak. Any policy responses aimed at slowing down the spread of the virus and mitigating its immediate effects on health care systems require a firm basis of information about the absolute number of currently infected people, growth rates, and locations/hotspots of infections. The only way to obtain this base of information is by conducting numerous tests in a targeted way. Currently, in Ghana, there is a centralized testing approach, that takes 4-5 days for samples to be shipped and tested at central reference laboratories with results communicated to the district, regional and national stakeholders. This delay in diagnosis increases the risk of ongoing transmission in communities and vulnerable institutions. We have validated, evaluated and deployed an innovative diagnostic tool on a mobile laboratory platform to accelerate the COVID-19 testing. A preliminary result of 74 samples from COVID-19 suspected cases has a positivity rate of 12% with a turn-around time of fewer than 3 hours from sample taking to reporting of results, significantly reducing the waiting time from days to hours, enabling expedient response by the health system for contact tracing to reduce transmission and additionally improving case management. FUNDING: Test kits were provided by AngloGold Ashanti Obuasi Mine (AngloGold Ashanti Health Foundation). The American Leprosy Mission donated the PCR machine, and the mobile laboratory van was funded by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (EKN). AAS, YAA was supported by (PANDORA-ID-NET RIA2016E-1609) and ROP supported by EDCTP Senior Fellowship (TMA2016SF), both funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP2) programme which is supported under Horizon 2020, the European Union.

Lepra dimorfa lepromatosa conyugal / Lepromatous dimorphic leprosy in spouses

Leprosy is a contagious, chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae. The immune response of the host to this bacillus is variable, determining different clinical forms of the same disease. Between the Lepromatous and Tuberculoid spectra, both stable clinical forms, the Dimorfo type can be presented, with great immunological instability, determining clinical characteristics, according to the pole to which most approaches. Leproatous dimorphic leprosy is characterized by brwn and violet macules, large number of lesions and less definition at its edges, variable sizes and alteration of sensitivity. Conjugal leprosy occurs in very few cases, knowing that intimate contaqct for a long time is an important factor, but has also demonstrated the fundamental role of immunity and genetics to acquire and develop the disease. We present two cases of lepromatous dimorphic leprosy in spouses, with 20 years of cohabitation, in which the same clinical presentation was found. Ths is an infrequent fact, given the low infectivity of the pathogen and the multiple varieties that could occur.

Leprosy New Case Detection Trends and the Future Effect of Preventive Interventions in Pará State, Brazil: A Modelling Study.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy remains a public health problem in Brazil. Although the overall number of new cases is declining, there are still areas with a high disease burden, such as Pará State in the north of the country. We aim to predict future trends in new case detection rate (NCDR) and explore the potential impact of contact tracing and chemoprophylaxis on NCDR in Pará State. METHODS: We used SIMCOLEP, an existing individual-based model for the transmission and control of M. leprae, in a population structured by households. The model was quantified to simulate the population and observed NCDR of leprosy in Pará State for the period 1990 to 2014. The baseline scenario was the current control program, consisting of multidrug therapy, passive case detection, and active case detection from 2003 onwards. Future projections of the NCDR were made until 2050 given the continuation of the current control program (i.e. baseline). We further investigated the potential impact of two scenarios for future control of leprosy: 1) discontinuation of contact tracing; and 2) continuation of current control in combination with chemoprophylaxis. Both scenarios started in 2015 and were projected until 2050. RESULTS: The modelled NCDR in Pará State after 2014 shows a continuous downward trend, reaching the official elimination target of 10 cases per 100,000 population by 2030. The cessation of systematic contact tracing would not result in a higher NCDR in the long run. Systematic contact tracing in combination with chemoprophylaxis for contacts would reduce the NCDR by 40% and bring attainment of the elimination target two years forward to 2028. CONCLUSION: The NCDR of leprosy continues to decrease in Pará State. Elimination of leprosy as a public health problem could possibly be achieved around 2030, if the current control program is maintained. Providing chemoprophylaxis would decrease the NCDR further and would bring elimination forward by two years.

Quantitative analyses and modelling to support achievement of the 2020 goals for nine neglected tropical diseases.

Quantitative analysis and mathematical models are useful tools in informing strategies to control or eliminate disease. Currently, there is an urgent need to develop these tools to inform policy to achieve the 2020 goals for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). In this paper we give an overview of a collection of novel model-based analyses which aim to address key questions on the dynamics of transmission and control of nine NTDs: Chagas disease, visceral leishmaniasis, human African trypanosomiasis, leprosy, soil-transmitted helminths, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis and trachoma. Several common themes resonate throughout these analyses, including: the importance of epidemiological setting on the success of interventions; targeting groups who are at highest risk of infection or re-infection; and reaching populations who are not accessing interventions and may act as a reservoir for infection,. The results also highlight the challenge of maintaining elimination 'as a public health problem' when true elimination is not reached. The models elucidate the factors that may be contributing most to persistence of disease and discuss the requirements for eventually achieving true elimination, if that is possible. Overall this collection presents new analyses to inform current control initiatives. These papers form a base from which further development of the models and more rigorous validation against a variety of datasets can help to give more detailed advice. At the moment, the models' predictions are being considered as the world prepares for a final push towards control or elimination of neglected tropical diseases by 2020.

Informe de simposio: desarrollando estrategias para detener la transmisión de la Lepra / No disponible

No disponible

Spatial heterogeneity in projected leprosy trends in India.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy is caused by infection with Mycobacterium leprae and is characterized by peripheral nerve damage and skin lesions. The disease is classified into paucibacillary (PB) and multibacillary (MB) leprosy. The 2012 London Declaration formulated the following targets for leprosy control: (1) global interruption of transmission or elimination by 2020, and (2) reduction of grade-2 disabilities in newly detected cases to below 1 per million population at a global level by 2020. Leprosy is treatable, but diagnosis, access to treatment and treatment adherence (all necessary to curtail transmission) represent major challenges. Globally, new case detection rates for leprosy have remained fairly stable in the past decade, with India responsible for more than half of cases reported annually. METHODS: We analyzed publicly available data from the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, and fit linear mixed-effects regression models to leprosy case detection trends reported at the district level. We assessed correlation of the new district-level case detection rate for leprosy with several state-level regressors: TB incidence, BCG coverage, fraction of cases exhibiting grade 2 disability at diagnosis, fraction of cases in children, and fraction multibacillary. RESULTS: Our analyses suggest an endemic disease in very slow decline, with substantial spatial heterogeneity at both district and state levels. Enhanced active case finding was associated with a higher case detection rate. CONCLUSIONS: Trend analysis of reported new detection rates from India does not support a thesis of rapid progress in leprosy control.

Global elimination of leprosy by 2020: are we on track?

BACKGROUND: Every year more than 200,000 new leprosy cases are registered globally. This number has been fairly stable over the past 8 years. WHO has set a target to interrupt the transmission of leprosy globally by 2020. The aim of this study is to investigate whether this target, interpreted as global elimination, is feasible given the current control strategy. We focus on the three most important endemic countries, India, Brazil and Indonesia, which together account for more than 80 % of all newly registered leprosy cases. METHODS: We used the existing individual-based model SIMCOLEP to predict future trends of leprosy incidence given the current control strategy in each country. SIMCOLEP simulates the spread of M. leprae in a population that is structured in households. Current control consists of passive and active case detection, and multidrug therapy (MDT). Predictions of leprosy incidence were made for each country as well as for one high-endemic region within each country: Chhattisgarh (India), Pará State (Brazil) and Madura (Indonesia). Data for model quantification came from: National Leprosy Elimination Program (India), SINAN database (Brazil), and Netherlands Leprosy Relief (Indonesia). RESULTS: Our projections of future leprosy incidence all show a downward trend. In 2020, the country-level leprosy incidence has decreased to 6.2, 6.1 and 3.3 per 100,000 in India, Brazil and Indonesia, respectively, meeting the elimination target of less than 10 per 100,000. However, elimination may not be achieved in time for the high-endemic regions. The leprosy incidence in 2020 is predicted to be 16.2, 21.1 and 19.3 per 100,000 in Chhattisgarh, Pará and Madura, respectively, and the target may only be achieved in another 5 to 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our predictions show that although country-level elimination is reached by 2020, leprosy is likely to remain a problem in the high-endemic regions (i.e. states, districts and provinces with multimillion populations), which account for most of the cases in a country.

Projeto Start - Estratégias para o início do tratamento antirretroviral / Project Start - Strategies for early treatment antirretroviral

Nesta edição do programa do Insight - Gerando Novas Ideias do dia 03 de dezembro recebeu a psicóloga e membro relator do CEP - SMS, Cristina Abbate e o médico infectologista Luiz Carlos Pereira Júnior, diretor do Instituto Emílio Ribas e coordenador do estudo internacional START - Estratégias para Início do Tratamento Antirretroviral. Este resultado levantou uma nova questão, usada como base no projeto: o tratamento da Aids com antirretrovirais era iniciado tardiamente.

Eye banking and corneal transplantation communicable adverse incidents: current status and project NOTIFY.

PURPOSE: Evidence of the transmission of disease via donor ocular tissue has been demonstrated for adenocarcinoma, rabies, hepatitis B virus, cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex virus, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and a variety of bacterial and fungal infections. METHODS: Although there is no evidence to date of disease transmission for HIV infection, syphilis, hepatitis C, hepatitis A, tuberculosis, HTLV-1 and -2 infection, active leprosy, active typhoid, smallpox, and active malaria, these entities remain contraindications for transplantation for all eye banks nationally and internationally. The potential sources of contamination include infected donors, during the process of removing tissue from cadaveric donors, the processing environment, and contaminated supplies and reagents used during processing. The transmissions of Herpes simplex virus and HSV via corneal graft have been shown to be responsible for primary graft failure. HSV-1 may also be an important cause of PFG. RESULTS: The long latency period of some diseases, the emergence of new infectious disease, and the reemergence of others emphasize the need for long-term record maintenance and effective tracing capabilities. CONCLUSIONS: The standardization of definitions for adverse events and reactions will be necessary to support the prevention and transmission of disease. International classification of a unique identification system for donors will be increasingly important for vigilance and traceability in cross-national exportation of human cells, tissues, and cellular- and tissue-based products. Opportunities for continuous improvement exist as does the need for constant vigilance and surveillance.

Patient-related factors predicting the effectiveness of rifampicin chemoprophylaxis in contacts: 6 year follow up of the COLEP cohort in Bangladesh.

OBJECTIVES: The COLEP trial in Bangladesh showed a 57% reduction in leprosy incidence among contacts of newly diagnosed patients in the first 2 years after chemoprophylaxis with single dose rifampicin (SDR). We assessed the impact of this intervention after 6 years and identified characteristics of the leprosy index patients predicting the effectiveness of this intervention. DESIGN: The cohort of 1037 patients and their 28 092 contacts that participated in the randomised placebo controlled field trial with single dose rifampicin was followed for 6 years. The leprosy status of contacts was established at 2, 4 and 6 years after the intervention. We assessed the association between characteristics of the index leprosy patients and the development of clinical leprosy among their contacts using logistic regression. RESULTS: The protective effect of SDR was seen only in the first 2 years, with no additional effect after 4 and 6 years. However, the total impact of the intervention was still statistically significant (P = 0.025) after 6 years and no excess cases were observed in the SDR arm at a later stage. The intervention prevented leprosy in contacts that actually received SDR, but did not offer protection to members of the same contact group who did not take chemoprophylaxis. The intervention was most effective in contact groups of female index patients, an enhanced effect was also observed in contact groups of patients belonging to a cluster of two or more leprosy patients at intake as well. CONCLUSION: These easy to recognise patient characteristics indicate a possible enhanced risk of transmission of Mycobacterium leprae to contacts in the vicinity of patients and are useful for deciding about preventive measures, such as early detection or chemoprophylaxis.

Prevención de la lepra: estudio convencional de contactos y quimioprofilaxis / No disponible

No disponible

Aceptación de quimioprofilaxis por los convivientes de pacientes de lepra en Bangladesh: estudio cualitativo / No disponible

Objetivos: La quimioprofilaxis con dosis única de rifampicina constituye una intervención prometedora para prevenir la lepra en los contactos de los pacientes. Sin embargo, su implementación en los programas de control requiere frecuentemente hacer público el diagnóstico de lepra, que en muchos países sigue siendo una infección estigmatizante. Promocionar el control y el tratamiento de la afecciones estigmatizantes sin contribuir a reducir el estigma de los individuos afectados puede resultar deficiente. El objetivo de este estudio era evaluar la aceptación social al revelar el diagnóstico y predisposición hacia la toma de medicamentos profilácticos en un área endémica de lepra de Bangladesh. Metodología: Estudio cualitativo a través de grupos de discusión con 136 hombres y mujeres sanos, de diferentes edades y religiones, procedente de dos aldeas rurales y un área urbana del noroeste de Bangladesh, y 14 trabajadores sanitarios con experiencia en tratar a paciente de lepra. Resultados: Los participantes no se opondrían a revelar el diagnóstico de lepra a los convivientes y parientes más cercanos si fueron diagnosticados de lepra. Sin embargo, muchos participantes no quisieron compartir esta información con sus vecinos y contactos sociales por el estigma de esta enfermedad. Todos los participantes estaban dispuestos a tomar quimioprofilaxis si cualquier contacto cercano a ellos resultara diagnosticado de lepra, incluso después de explicarles que no estaba garantizada la protección total contra la lepra. Conclusión: Se puede afirmar que la quimioprofilaxis para los convivientes de los pacientes de lepra es una condición efectiva y socialmente aceptable para los programas de control actuales. La quimioprofilaxis para otro tipo de contacto que podría beneficiarse sólo sería factible sin revelar la información sobre los pacientes, si se administra en forma de campañas para toda la población del área (AU)

No disponible

The impact of leprosy control on the transmission of M. leprae: is elimination being attained?

In 1991 the World Health Assembly decided to 'eliminate leprosy as a public health problem' by the year 2000. Elimination was defined as reducing the global prevalence of the disease to less than 1 case per 10,000. In 2000 the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that elimination was reached globally. Conventionally control of disease is defined as the reduction of disease burden to a locally acceptable level. Elimination of disease is defined as the reduction to zero of the incidence in a defined geographical area, and eradication is defined as the permanent reduction to zero of the worldwide incidence of infection caused by a specific agent. In leprosy however, WHO limited elimination to control instead of transmission, by using prevalence instead of incidence of disease. Leprosy statistics usually report on prevalence and new case detection. Prevalence is linked to length of treatment, which has changed over time. Trends in new case detection rates only reflect trends in incidence rates when no changes occur in case detection, but in the past 25 years case detection in leprosy has been determined strongly by operational factors. For the leprosy elimination strategy it was assumed that MDT would reduce transmission of M. leprae, but there is no convincing evidence for this. Data for evaluating the impact of MDT on transmission are not readily available because leprosy has a long incubation period. Also declines in case detection may have other causes, such as BCG vaccination. Mathematical modelling of the transmission and control of leprosy showed that the elimination strategy reduces transmission slowly, with a predicted annual decline in incidence ranging from 2% to 12%. Early case finding was the key factor to attain this decline. Future projections of the global leprosy burden indicated that 5 million new cases would arise between 2000 and 2020, and that in 2020 there would be 1 million people with WHO grade 2 disability. It is concluded that substantial progress has been made to control leprosy, but when elimination of disease is defined as the reduction to zero of the incidence, leprosy is definitely not eliminated. To attain elimination of leprosy it is necessary to find effective interventions to interrupt transmission of M. leprae and practical diagnostic tools to detect levels of infection that can lead to transmission. This requires extensive research in the areas of epidemiology and microbiology.