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

BACKGROUND: Leprosy, cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) and Chagas disease (CD) are neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) with a high psychosocial burden in Norte de Santander and Arauca in Colombia. This study provides insights into affected persons' feelings, perceptions and experiences to better understand the nature of this burden. METHODS: In 2018, 34 leprosy, CD and CL patients participated in four focus groups discussing the influence of the disease on mental well-being, social participation and stigma. Additionally, 13 leprosy patients participated in semi-structured interviews to further explore the health-related stigma related to this disease. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and open coding was used to identify the most relevant categories and themes. RESULTS: Persons suffering from CD reported that their mental distress was mainly caused by impairments and stress related to the progressive and incurable nature of the disease. Persons affected by CL perceived the treatment for the disease as having the most impact on their psychosocial well-being. Persons affected by leprosy reported suffering most from anticipated and experienced stigma. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that these diseases are likely to impose a significant psychosocial burden on patients in the studied regions, even though these vary per condition. Consistent data collection on the psychosocial burden and the sharing of knowledge of effective interventions can contribute to the holistic approach needed to win the fight against NTDs.

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.

Prolaxis post-exposición para lepra con dosis única de rifampicina: manual para su implementación / Post-exposure prolaxis for leprosy with a single dose of rifampicin: a manual for its implementation

Objetivo: La profilaxis post-exposición de la lepra con dosis única de rifampicina (SDR-PEP) ha demostrado ser efectiva y aplicable y está recomendada por la OMS desde 2018. Esta caja de herramientas SDR-PEP se desarrolló a través de la experiencia de la profilaxis lepra post-eliminación (LPEP). Se ha diseñado para facilitar y estandarizar la implementación del seguimiento de contactos y la administración SDR-PEP en regiones y países que iniciaron la intervención. Resultados: Se desarrollaron cuatro instrumentos, incorporando la evidencia existente actual para SDR-PEP y los métodos y enseñanzas del proyecto LPEP en ocho países. (1) El conjunto de diapositivas Powerpoint política/apoyo que ayudarán a los programadores sobre la evidencia, practicabilidad y recursos necesarios para SDR-PEP, (2) La colección de diapositivas PowerPoint sobre formación e implementación en el campo para formar al personal implicado en el seguimiento de contactos y PEP con SDR, (3) manual genérico de campo SDR-PEP que puede ser usado para formar un protocolo específico de campo para el seguimiento de contactos y SDR-PEP como referencia para el personal directamente implicado. Finalmente, (4) el manual director SDR-PEP, que resume los distintos componentes de la caja de herramientas y contiene las instrucciones para su uso. Conclusión: En respuesta al interés manifestado por varios países de implementar el seguimiento de contactos de lepra con PEP con SDR, con las recomendaciones OMS sobre SDR-PEP, esta caja de herramientas basada en la evidencia concreta pero flexible, ha sido diseñada para servir a los directores de programas nacionales de lepra con un medio práctico para trasladar los planteamientos a la práctica. Está disponible gratuitamente en la página de Infolep y actualizada constantemente: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-post-exposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

Objective: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. Results: Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. Conclusion: In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

An enhanced regimen as post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for leprosy: PEP+.

The ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae reflected in a very slow decline in leprosy incidence, forces us to be innovative and conduct cutting-edge research. Single dose rifampicin (SDR) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for contacts of leprosy patients, reduces their risk to develop leprosy by 60%. This is a promising new preventive measure that can be integrated into routine leprosy control programmes, as is being demonstrated in the Leprosy Post-Exposure Programme that is currently ongoing in eight countries.The limited (60%) effectiveness of SDR is likely due to the fact that some contacts have a preclinical infection beyond the early stages for which SDR is not sufficient to prevent the development of clinical signs and symptoms of leprosy. An enhanced regimen, more potent against a higher load of leprosy bacteria, would increase the effectiveness of this preventive measure significantly.The Netherlands Leprosy Relief (NLR) is developing a multi-country study aiming to show that breaking the chain of transmission of M. leprae is possible, evidenced by a dramatic reduction in incidence. In this study the assessment of the effectiveness of an enhanced prophylactic regimen for leprosy is an important component. To define the so called PEP++ regimen for this intervention study, NLR convened an Expert Meeting that was attended by clinical leprologists, public health experts, pharmacologists, dermatologists and microbiologists.The Expert Meeting advised on combinations of available drugs, with known efficacy against leprosy, as well as on the duration of the intake, aiming at a risk reduction of 80-90%. To come to a conclusion the Expert Meeting considered the bactericidal, sterilising and bacteriostatic activity of the potential drugs. The criteria used to determine an optimal enhanced regimen were: effectiveness, safety, acceptability, availability, affordability, feasibility and not inducing drug resistance.The Expert Meeting concluded that the enhanced regimen for the PEP++ study should comprise three standard doses of rifampicin 600 mg (weight adjusted when given to children) plus moxifloxacin 400 mg given at four-weekly intervals. For children and for adults with contraindications for moxifloxacin, moxifloxacin should be replaced by clarithromycin 300 mg (weight adjusted).