xxx-ILC 4.2-024 Poster-Shahed Hossain Bangladesh-2 PDF

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 22

How Big or Small Leprosy in

Bangladesh: A Country Situation


Analysis, Epidemiology, Programme
and Policy Implications

Shahed Hossain1, Rezia Akhter2, Aprue Mong3, SA Hadi3,


Humayun Kabir1, David Pahan3, Safir Uddin Ahmed2, Nafisa Huq1

1. International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b),


2. National Leprosy Elimination Programme, Bangladesh
3. Lepra Bangladesh
Background: Bangladesh Situation 1985-2012

Indicators Pre MDT 1993 1999 2012


1985 MDT Post New
extension elimination strategy
Population (in millions) 100 110 125 155
Prevalence (Number) 52161 22334 11091 3459
Prevalence rate / 10,000 5.2 2.3 0.89 0.22
New Case detection (Number) 4834 6943 14338 3576
Detection Rate/100,000 4.8 6.3 11.5 2.3
Grade 2 deformity (%) 35.6 21.4 8.7 11.0
MB (%) 44.6 60.4 37.8 43.9
Children < 15 Years (%) 7.9 11.7 15.4 5.6
Female (%) N/A N/A N/A 38.6
Background: Bangladesh Situation 1985-2012, programmatic

Indicators 1985 1993 1999 2012


Pre MDT MDT extension Post New Strategy
elimination
Cases self reported (%) Not available Not available 31 29.1
Programme approach Vertical Integrated Integrated Integrated
MDT services centre Not available 120 625 640
MDT completion rate (%) Not available Not available Not available > 90% (2010 &
2011 cohort)
NGO involvement Limited Limited 10 NGO 10 NGO
partners partners
Recording and reporting None Poor Standard Standard
systems /Inadequate /Annually /Annually
produced/ produced /
Paper based paper based
General Health Staff Not available 416 36000 40,000
Leprosy trained*

* At least received one day orientation once, No QC done


Objectives
To understand the current situation of leprosy in Bangladesh in terms of
burden of disease, service provision and gaps in the service provision.

Specific objectives:

• To analyze current situation and trend of leprosy from 2008 to 2014


(Data further updated to 2015 for this presentation)

• To assess performance of NLEP and implementing partners including,


technical and management activities

• To provide recommendations for a better management and


appropriate intervention plan for leprosy programme
Materials and methods
1. Disease mapping
2. Case validation study
3. Facility assessment
4. Providers survey
5. In-depth interview (IDI) & Group discussion with managers
6. Informal care providers interview
7. Community survey
8. Exit interview and survey with people affected by leprosy
9. Individual case study
10. Stakeholder analysis
Study Sites

Sites were selected in a stratified cluster


sampling design.

Districts are clusters


Stratified according to the prevalence of
leprosy cases in 2012 into High/ Medium /
Low areas
Total 10 districts were selected in a PPM
mechanism randomly from each strata
(Bogra and Moulvibazar were pre selected)
Findings

Disease mapping
Provider’s Perspectives
People’s Perspectives
Patient's Perspectives
Trends in Prevalence &

New case detection rate/100,000 population


New case detection
4.00 0.28 0.30

Prevalence rate /10,000 population


0.27
0.24 0.24
3.61 3.55 0.22 0.22 0.25
3.00 0.21
0.20
6 2.97 0.20
2.60 2.5
2.00 2.30 2.3 0.15
1.99
Prevalence rate /10,000 population

5 0.10
1.00
0.05
4
0.00 0.00
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

3 New case detection rate Prevelance rate

Decline or plateau
MDT
1

Elimination
0
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Trends in case detection: Child, G2D, MB, Female cases
With modes of case detection
70

60

50

40
%
30

20

10

0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

CH Dis MB Female CT Vol Ref & Others


Incidence in 2015
Provider’s perspectives

• Knowledge on leprosy signs and symptoms inadequate


• Varying responses on where to refer, and when to refer
Community Survey
• All participants heard about leprosy

• > 70% answered anyone could be affected by Leprosy


• 78% knew that leprosy is curable
• 8.8% aware about the mode of transmission
<1% knew about cardinal signs and symptoms
• Major source of information was
- neighbors and relatives (60.0%),
- service providers (28.0% )
- media(29.0%)
Stigma and other consequences

• Low self esteem- often self created isolation from participating in social activities

• Reported drop out from school

• Neighbor refused to receive cooked meal by patient

• Afraid of getting married (unmarried female patient)

• Mother is isolated from children

• Joint family separated

• Geographical variation in terms of social stigma- common in Northern part and hilly
areas of Bandarban
Attitude towards PABL

• ≥ 10 % participants will not


- maintain their contact with a PABL
- allow them in community event
- honor them

• One third participants not willing to buy anything from


a PABL or
travel with them.

• Around one-fifth of the participants would not invite


PABL at home or
social events.
Prevalence of Leprosy cases
Characteristics %

Age (In yrs)


<15 8.2
15-35 40.2
35+ 51.6
Asset quintiles
Rich 4.9 Leprosy is more common
Middle Class 24.6 among
Poor 70.5
Occupation
the poor, less educated
Day Labor 43.4 and male
Sales and service 16.4
House wife 16.4
Population
Others 23.8
Sex
Male 71.3
Female 28.7
Education (in yrs)
No schooling 40.2
1-5 33.6
6+ 26.2
Patients knew that leprosy
is contagious
13.3 20 Yes

No Mode of transmission
Don't know 23.3 Bacteria/Air
/Cough
66.7
Other
76.7 causes

Perception on curability
7% 3%

Curable
Not curable
Don't know
90%
Hidden Challenges

• Reduction of leprosy prevalence and to guarantee of quality


services especially in areas with very low number of cases

• Sustaining leprosy expertise within the health services

• Unsolved aspects of stigma and human rights

• Adequate fund flow in leprosy activity


Way forward
• To undertake measures to effective integration of leprosy services in to
general health services
• Development of effective tools for detecting cases early, including tools
for early recognition and management of leprosy reactions
• Effective referral systems
• Strong Monitoring and evaluation
• Continuous disease surveillance
• Effective recording reporting
• more in-depth epidemiological analysis
• RFT, disability grade 0 and 1 cases
• A strong central monitoring mechanism
• Innovative and strong IEC to create demand in the community
• Scope of M-health and E-health
• Needs to strengthen prevention of disabilities and rehabilitation

You might also like