Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis ; 15(12): e0010035, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34898634

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Leprosy and cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) are neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) affecting the skin. Their control is challenging but the integration of skin NTDs control programs is recommended to improve timely detection and treatment. However, little is known about the occurrence of leprosy and CL in the same individuals, and what are the characteristics of such patients. This study aimed to identify and characterize patients diagnosed with both leprosy and CL (i.e., outcome) in the hyperendemic state of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Also, we investigated the demographic risk factors associated with the period between the diagnosis of both diseases. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted with patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2017. From the leprosy (n = 28,204) and CL (n = 24,771) databases of the national reporting system, 414 (0.8%; 414/52,561) patients presenting both diseases were identified through a probabilistic linkage procedure. This observed number was much higher than the number of patients that would be expected by chance alone (n = 22). The spatial distribution of patients presenting the outcome was concentrated in the North and Northeast mesoregions of the state. Through survival analysis, we detected that the probability of a patient developing both diseases increased over time from 0.2% in the first year to 1.0% within seven years. Further, using a Cox model we identified male sex (HR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.7-2.9) and low schooling level (HR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.2-1.9) as positively associated with the outcome. Furthermore, the hazard of developing the outcome was higher among individuals aged 40-55 years. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Leprosy and CL are affecting the same individuals in the area. Integration of control policies for both diseases will help to efficiently cover such patients. Measures should be focused on timely diagnosis by following-up patients diagnosed with CL, active case detection, and training of health professionals.


Subject(s)
Coinfection/epidemiology , Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous/epidemiology , Leprosy/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Coinfection/diagnosis , Endemic Diseases , Female , Humans , Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous/diagnosis , Leprosy/diagnosis , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Young Adult
2.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis ; 15(3): e0009279, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33788863

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of single dose rifampicin (SDR) to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. As the impact of the programme is difficult to establish in the short term, we apply mathematical modelling to predict its long-term impact on the leprosy incidence. METHODOLOGY: The individual-based model SIMCOLEP was calibrated and validated to the historic leprosy incidence data in the study areas. For each area, we assessed two scenarios: 1) continuation of existing routine activities as in 2014; and 2) routine activities combined with LPEP starting in 2015. The number of contacts per index patient screened varied from 1 to 36 between areas. Projections were made until 2040. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all areas, the LPEP program increased the number of detected cases in the first year(s) of the programme as compared to the routine programme, followed by a faster reduction afterwards with increasing benefit over time. LPEP could accelerate the reduction of the leprosy incidence by up to six years as compared to the routine programme. The impact of LPEP varied by area due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient included and differences in leprosy epidemiology and routine control programme. CONCLUSIONS: The LPEP program contributes significantly to the reduction of the leprosy incidence and could potentially accelerate the interruption of transmission. It would be advisable to include contact tracing/screening and SDR in routine leprosy programmes.


Subject(s)
Contact Tracing/methods , Leprosy/epidemiology , Leprosy/prevention & control , Mass Screening/methods , Primary Prevention/methods , Brazil , Humans , India , Indonesia/epidemiology , Leprostatic Agents/therapeutic use , Myanmar/epidemiology , Nepal/epidemiology , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Rifampin/therapeutic use , Sri Lanka/epidemiology , Tanzania/epidemiology
3.
s.l; s.n; 2021. 9 p. tab.
Non-conventional in English | HANSEN, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, CONASS, Hanseníase Leprosy, SESSP-ILSLACERVO, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1146973

ABSTRACT

Background: Innovative approaches are required for leprosy control to reduce cases and curb transmission of Mycobacterium leprae. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis are the most promising tools. We aimed to generate evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and administration of single-dose rifampicin (SDR) into routine leprosy control activities. Methods The leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme was an international, multicentre feasibility study implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. LPEP explored the feasibility of combining three key interventions: systematically tracing contacts of individuals newly diagnosed with leprosy; screening the traced contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Outcomes were assessed in terms of number of contacts traced, screened, and SDR administration rates. Findings Between Jan 1, 2015, and Aug 1, 2019, LPEP enrolled 9170 index patients and listed 179 769 contacts, of whom 174782 (97·2%) were successfully traced and screened. Of those screened, 22 854 (13·1%) were excluded from SDR mainly because of health reasons and age. Among those excluded, 810 were confirmed as new patients (46 per 10 000 contacts screened). Among the eligible screened contacts, 1182 (0·7%) refused prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 151 928 (86·9%) screened contacts. No serious adverse events were reported. Interpretation Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into different leprosy control programmes with minimal additional efforts once contact tracing has been established; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts, and health-care workers. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control through the availability of a prophylactic intervention; therefore, we recommend rolling out SDR in all settings where contact tracing and screening have been established(AU).


Subject(s)
Rifampin/therapeutic use , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Leprosy/prevention & control , Feasibility Studies , Mass Screening , Public Health/methods , Precision Medicine/methods , Leprostatic Agents/therapeutic use
4.
s.l; s.n; 2021. 14 p. tab, graf.
Non-conventional in English | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, CONASS, SESSP-ILSLPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-ILSLACERVO, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1292377

ABSTRACT

Leprosy is a chronic, disabling disease that causes various kinds of disability in the affected person. This includes physical impairment, activity limitation, and participation restriction. However, the published global burden of disease estimates for leprosy is considered to be a gross under-estimation. Disability weights form an integral component in the calculation of the burden estimates. But the methodology for calculation of the weights focuses only on physical impairment and lacks the perspective of the patient. In this study, we systematically reviewed the literature and performed an individual patient data meta analysis for revising the disability weights for leprosy using domain scores from health related quality of life instruments. The domains of these instruments cover all aspects of disability from a patient's perspective. We found that the revised weights were considerably higher than the current weights, and were more reflective of the actual disability caused by leprosy. We also found that for individuals without any severe disability due to leprosy (grade 0), they still experience comparable suffering. Revision of the current disability weights and inclusion of the disability caused in grade 0 individuals will contribute towards better estimation of the global burden of leprosy.


Subject(s)
Humans , Quality of Life , Disabled Persons , Global Burden of Disease , Leprosy/pathology , Patients , Weights and Measures
5.
s.l; s.n; 2021. 14 p. tab, graf.
Non-conventional in English | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, HANSEN, CONASS, Hanseníase Leprosy, SESSP-ILSLPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-ILSLACERVO, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1292662

ABSTRACT

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of SDR to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in states or districts of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. This study investigated the long-term impact of the LPEP program on the leprosy new case detection rate (NCDR). Our results show that LPEP could reduce the NCDR beyond the impact of the routine leprosy control programme and that many new cases could be prevented. The benefit of LPEP increases gradually over time. LPEP could accelerate the time of reaching predicted NCDR levels of 2040 under routine program by up to six years. Furthermore, we highlighted how the impact varies between countries due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient screened and differences in leprosy epidemiology and national control programme. Generally, including both household contacts and neighbours (> 20 contacts per index patient) would yield the highest impact.


Subject(s)
Humans , Primary Prevention/methods , Contact Tracing/methods , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis , Leprosy/prevention & control , Leprosy/epidemiology , Rifampin/therapeutic use , Sri Lanka/epidemiology , Tanzania/epidemiology , Brazil , Mass Screening , Myanmar/epidemiology , India , Indonesia/epidemiology , Nepal/epidemiology
6.
Geospat Health ; 15(2)2020 12 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33461274

ABSTRACT

Neglected tropical diseases characterized by skin lesions are highly endemic in the state of Mato Grosso, Brazil. We analyzed the spatial distribution of leprosy and Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) and identified the degree of overlap in their distribution. All new cases of leprosy and CL reported between 2008 and 2017 through the national reporting system were included in the study. Scan statistics together with univariate Global and Local Moran's I were employed to identify clusters and spatial autocorrelation for each disease, with the spatial correlation between leprosy and CL measured by bivariate Global and Local Moran's I. Finally, we evaluated the demographic characteristics of the patients. The number of leprosy (N = 28,204) and CL (N = 24,771) cases in Mato Grosso and the highly smoothed detection coefficients indicated hyperendemicity and spatial distribution heterogeneity. Scan statistics demonstrated overlap of high-risk clusters for leprosy (RR = 2.0; P <0.001) and CL (RR = 4.0; P <0.001) in the North and Northeast mesoregions. Global Moran's I revealed a spatial autocorrelation for leprosy (0.228; P = 0.001) and CL (0.311; P = 0.001) and a correlation between them (0.164; P = 0.001). Both diseases were found to be concentrated in urban areas among men aged 31-60 years, of brown-skinned ethnicity and with a low educational level. Our findings indicate a need for developing integrated and spatially as well as socio-demographically targeted public health policies.


Subject(s)
Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous/epidemiology , Leprosy/epidemiology , Spatial Analysis , Adult , Brazil/epidemiology , Geographic Mapping , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
7.
s.l; s.n; 2020. 9 p. ilus.
Non-conventional in Spanish | HANSEN, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, CONASS, Hanseníase Leprosy, SESSP-ILSLPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-ILSLACERVO, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1146969

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Post-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Leprostatic Agents/administration & dosage , Leprosy/prevention & control , Rifampin/administration & dosage , Single Dose
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL