OBJECTIVE: In 2005 a visceral leishmaniasis (VL) elimination initiative was launched on the Indian subcontinent, with early diagnosis based on a rapid diagnostic test and treatment with the oral drug miltefosine as its main strategy. Several recent studies have signaled underreporting of VL cases in the region. Information on treatment outcomes is scanty. Our aim was to document VL case management by the primary health care services in India. METHODS: We took a random sample of all VL patients registered in rural primary health care (PHC) facilities of Muzaffarpur district, Bihar, India during 2008. Patients were traced at home for an interview and their records were reviewed. We recorded patient and doctor delay, treatment regimens, treatment outcomes and costs incurred by patients. RESULTS: We could review records of all 150 patients sampled and interview 139 patients or their guardian. Most patients (81%) had first presented to unqualified practitioners; median delay before reaching the appropriate primary healthcare facility was 40 days (IQR 31-59 days). Existing networks of village health workers were under-used. 48% of VL patients were treated with antimonials; 40% of those needed a second treatment course. Median direct expenditure by patients was 4000 rupees per episode (IQR 2695-5563 rupees), equivalent to almost 2 months of household income. CONCLUSION: In 2008 still critical flaws remained in VL case management in the primary health care services in Bihar: obsolete use of antimonials with high failure rates and long patient delay. To meet the target of the VL elimination, more active case detection strategies are needed, and village health worker networks could be more involved. Costs to patients remain an obstacle to early case finding.
OBJECTIVE: In 2005 a visceral leishmaniasis (VL) elimination initiative was launched on the Indian subcontinent, with early diagnosis based on a rapid diagnostic test and treatment with the oral drug miltefosine as its main strategy. Several recent studies have signaled underreporting of VL cases in the region. Information on treatment outcomes is scanty. Our aim was to document VL case management by the primary health care services in India. METHODS: We took a random sample of all VL patients registered in rural primary health care (PHC) facilities of Muzaffarpur district, Bihar, India during 2008. Patients were traced at home for an interview and their records were reviewed. We recorded patient and doctor delay, treatment regimens, treatment outcomes and costs incurred by patients. RESULTS: We could review records of all 150 patients sampled and interview 139 patients or their guardian. Most patients (81%) had first presented to unqualified practitioners; median delay before reaching the appropriate primary healthcare facility was 40 days (IQR 31-59 days). Existing networks of village health workers were under-used. 48% of VL patients were treated with antimonials; 40% of those needed a second treatment course. Median direct expenditure by patients was 4000 rupees per episode (IQR 2695-5563 rupees), equivalent to almost 2 months of household income. CONCLUSION: In 2008 still critical flaws remained in VL case management in the primary health care services in Bihar: obsolete use of antimonials with high failure rates and long patient delay. To meet the target of the VL elimination, more active case detection strategies are needed, and village health worker networks could be more involved. Costs to patients remain an obstacle to early case finding.
Authors: Vijay P Singh; Alok Ranjan; Roshan K Topno; Rakesh B Verma; Niyamat A Siddique; Vidya N Ravidas; Narendra Kumar; Krishna Pandey; Pradeep Das Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: M Boelaert; B Criel; J Leeuwenburg; W Van Damme; D Le Ray; P Van der Stuyft Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg Date: 2000 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.184
Authors: Dia-Eldin A Elnaiem; Judith Schorscher; Anna Bendall; Valérie Obsomer; Maha E Osman; Abdelrafie M Mekkawi; Stephen J Connor; Richard W Ashford; Madeleine C Thomson Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Caryn Bern; Allen W Hightower; Rajib Chowdhury; Mustakim Ali; Josef Amann; Yukiko Wagatsuma; Rashidul Haque; Katie Kurkjian; Louise E Vaz; Moarrita Begum; Tangin Akter; Catherine B Cetre-Sossah; Indu B Ahluwalia; Ellen Dotson; W Evan Secor; Robert F Breiman; James H Maguire Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: P Malaviya; R P Singh; S P Singh; E Hasker; B Ostyn; R Shankar; M Boelaert; S Sundar Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2011-05-30 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Meghan R Perry; Susan Wyllie; Andrea Raab; Joerg Feldmann; Alan H Fairlamb Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 11.205