PURPOSE: To assess the usefulness of Trachoma Rapid Assessment (RA) in priority ranking of trachoma areas. METHODS: RA was conducted concurrently with a cross-sectional trachoma prevalence survey in some villages selected from the communities at risk for trachoma in the Kaita Local Government Area of northern Nigeria. The RA team consisted of two ophthalmic nurses. Pen torches and loupes were used for the examination. Data were collected on the seven components of the RA 'information pyramid' for all the selected villages. The data were analyzed using the RA methodology guidelines to determine the priority villages for trachoma intervention. This was compared with the ranking from the cross-sectional trachoma prevalence survey. RESULTS: The results of RA were found to be in agreement with the cross-sectional survey in 53.3% of the villages in the priority ranking of trichiasis, while in the priority ranking of active trachoma the agreement between the two methods was found to be 60%. The risk factors for trachoma were shown to be of high magnitude in all the villages using both the RA method and the prevalence survey. CONCLUSION: RA may be a more useful tool when applied to a vast area where the risk of trachoma is likely to differ greatly between different parts of the area. In the determination of the trichiasis pattern of a community by RA, it may be more useful to use the actual number of trichiasis cases in the area rather than the prevalence of trichiasis. The operational definition of some risk factor indicators seems very subjective and vague. The RA method needs more validation to sharpen the indicators used.
PURPOSE: To assess the usefulness of Trachoma Rapid Assessment (RA) in priority ranking of trachoma areas. METHODS:RA was conducted concurrently with a cross-sectional trachoma prevalence survey in some villages selected from the communities at risk for trachoma in the Kaita Local Government Area of northern Nigeria. The RA team consisted of two ophthalmic nurses. Pen torches and loupes were used for the examination. Data were collected on the seven components of the RA 'information pyramid' for all the selected villages. The data were analyzed using the RA methodology guidelines to determine the priority villages for trachoma intervention. This was compared with the ranking from the cross-sectional trachoma prevalence survey. RESULTS: The results of RA were found to be in agreement with the cross-sectional survey in 53.3% of the villages in the priority ranking of trichiasis, while in the priority ranking of active trachoma the agreement between the two methods was found to be 60%. The risk factors for trachoma were shown to be of high magnitude in all the villages using both the RA method and the prevalence survey. CONCLUSION:RA may be a more useful tool when applied to a vast area where the risk of trachoma is likely to differ greatly between different parts of the area. In the determination of the trichiasis pattern of a community by RA, it may be more useful to use the actual number of trichiasis cases in the area rather than the prevalence of trichiasis. The operational definition of some risk factor indicators seems very subjective and vague. The RA method needs more validation to sharpen the indicators used.
Authors: Emily Robinson; Lucia W Kur; Aggrey Ndyaba; Mounir Lado; Juma Shafi; Emmanuel Kabare; R Scott McClelland; Jan H Kolaczinski Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 3.240