The Prevalence of Previously Undiagnosed Leprosy in the General Population of Northwest Bangladesh
Open Access
- 27 February 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
- Vol. 2 (2) , e198
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0000198
Abstract
The prevalence of previously undiagnosed leprosy (PPUL) in the general population was determined to estimate the background level of leprosy in the population and to compare this with registered prevalence and the known PPUL in different levels of contacts of leprosy patients. Multistage cluster sampling including 20 clusters of 1,000 persons each in two districts with over 4 million population. Physical examination was performed on all individuals. The number of newly found leprosy cases among 17,862 people above 5 years of age from the cluster sample was 27 (19 SLPB, 8 PB2-5), giving a PPUL rate of 15.1 per 10,000. PPUL in the general population is six times higher than the registered prevalence, but three times lower than that in the most distant subgroup of contacts (neighbour of neighbour and social contacts) of leprosy patients in the same area. Full village or neighbourhood surveys may be preferable to contact surveys where leprosy is highly endemic. In order to estimate the level of leprosy in an area with many leprosy patients, we determined the prevalence of previously undiagnosed leprosy in the general population and compared this with the registered (or known) number of leprosy patients. We also compared it with the known prevalence of leprosy in contacts of leprosy patients. We examined 20 randomly selected geographical clusters of 1,000 persons each in two districts of Bangladesh, with over 4 million population. Physical examination was performed on all individuals. The number of newly found leprosy cases among 17,862 people above 5 years of age from the clusters was 27, giving a rate of previously undiagnosed leprosy of 15.1 per 10,000. This rate is six times higher than the registered prevalence, but three times lower than the rate in the most distant subgroup of contacts (neighbour of neighbour and social contacts) of leprosy patients in the same area. We conclude that in areas where leprosy is common, it may be preferable to do full village or neighbourhood surveys when a new leprosy patient is found, rather than to limit contact surveys to close contacts only, such as household members.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- The spatial distribution of leprosy in four villages in Bangladesh: An observational studyBMC Infectious Diseases, 2008
- Physical Distance, Genetic Relationship, Age, and Leprosy Classification Are Independent Risk Factors for Leprosy in Contacts of Patients with LeprosyThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2006
- Close contacts with leprosy in newly diagnosed leprosy patients in a high and low endemic area: comparison between Bangladesh and Thailand.2005
- Hidden leprosy--who is hiding from whom?2004
- Risk factors for the development of clinical leprosy among contacts, and their relevance for targeted interventionsLeprosy Review, 2004
- A study on transmission and a trial of chemoprophylaxis in contacts of leprosy patients: design, methodology and recruitment findings of COLEPLeprosy Review, 2004
- A comparison of Rapid Village Survey and Leprosy Elimination Campaign, detection methods in two districts of East Java, Indonesia, 1997/1998 and 1999/2000.2002
- Vigilância da hanseníase em Olinda, Brasil, utilizando técnicas de análise espacialCadernos de Saude Publica, 2001
- Self-healing Leprosy: Report on 2749 PatientsLeprosy Review, 1974