| Literature DB >> 21347452 |
Shri Prakash Singh1, Siddhivinayak Hirve, M Mamun Huda, Megha Raj Banjara, Narendra Kumar, Dinesh Mondal, Shyam Sundar, Pradeep Das, Chitra Kumar Gurung, Suman Rijal, C P Thakur, Beena Varghese, Axel Kroeger.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The VL elimination strategy requires cost-effective tools for case detection and management. This intervention study tests the yield, feasibility and cost of 4 different active case detection (ACD) strategies (camp, index case, incentive and blanket approach) in VL endemic districts of India, Nepal and Bangladesh. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21347452 PMCID: PMC3035672 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000960
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Case yield by different ACD strategies.
| Round 1 | Round 2 (4 to 6 months after 1st round) | |||||||||
| SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'SinghB'desh | Overall | SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'SinghB'desh | Overall | |
|
| ||||||||||
| No. of Camps held | 19 | 21 | 6 | 15 | 61 | 18 | 14 | 6 | 14 | 52 |
| Average # of camp attendees | 301 | 87 | 83 | 178 | 649 | 351 | 23 | 63 | 77 | 514 |
| Old VL cases | 5 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 22 |
| Fever cases (>14 days) screened | 45 | 87 | 80 | 133 | 345 | 64 | 23 | 45 | 64 | 196 |
| New VL cases | 5 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 22 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 12 |
| Old PKDL cases (<1 yr) detected | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Suspected Skin lesions screened | 0 | 0 | 3 | 50 | 53 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| New PKDL cases detected | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Total population screened | 47908 | 42761 | 35081 | 40100 | 165850 | 48461 | 43565 | 33744 | 40065 | 165835 |
| Old VL cases (<1 yr) detected | 127 | 113 | 96 | 80 | 416 | 32 | 23 | 4 | 74 | 133 |
| Fever cases (>14 days) | 60 | 157 | 80 | 252 | 549 | 82 | 95 | 71 | 161 | 409 |
| New VL cases | 6 | 3 | 5 | 14 | 28 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 20 |
| Old PKDL cases | 8 | 3 | 0 | 13 | 24 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 17 | 22 |
| Suspected Skin lesions screened | 4 | 7 | 0 | 84 | 95 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 23 | 36 |
| New PKDL cases detected | 0 | 5 | 0 | 60 | 65 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 9 |
|
| ||||||||||
| # old VL index cases reported by PHC | 80 | 58 | 19 | 79 | 236 | 30 | 16 | 5 | 87 | 138 |
| New VL cases detected in focal search around index case (rK39 +ve) | 4 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 12 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| New PKDL cases detected in focal search | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||||||
| New VL cases detected by incentives | 15 | 4 | 4 | 23 | ||||||
| Total population screened in incentive approach study area (HH survey) | 42874 | 44090 | 34015 | 120979 | ||||||
| Old VL cases (1 yr) detected in HH screening in incentive area | 19 | 6 | 4 | 29 | ||||||
| New VL cases | 19 | 6 | 4 | 29 | ||||||
Old case defined as case detected by passive case detection/routine surveillance but not necessarily notified.
New case defined as fever more than 14 days + splenomegaly + rK39 test positive.
New cases detected by blanket approach includes the new cases detected by the preceding camp approach.
Old cases detected by blanket approach includes the old cases detected by the preceding camp approach.
New VL cases detected in household survey includes the new VL cases detected by the incentive based approach.
Sensitivity (95% CI) of camp, index and incentive approach with reference to blanket approach for detecting VL and/or PKDL cases.
| Round 1 | Round 2 | |||||||||
| Saran India | M'pur India | Sarlahi Nepal | M'sinh B'desh | Overall | Saran India | M'pur India | Sarlahi Nepal | M'sinh B'desh | Overall | |
|
| ||||||||||
| VL(95% CI) | 83.3% (5/6)(35.8–99.5) | 100% (3/3)(29.2–100) | 100% (5/5)(47.8–100) | 64.3% (9/14)(35.1–87.2) | 78.6% (22/28)(59.0–91.7) | 62.5% (5/8)(24.4–91.4) | 100% (2/2)(15.8–100) | 100% (3/3)(29.2–100) | 28.6% (2/7)(3.6–70.9) | 60% (12/20)(36.0–80.8) |
| PKDL(95% CI) | --- | 0% (0/5)(0–52.2) | --- | 70.0% (42/60)(56.7–81.1) | 64.6% (42/65)(51.7–76.1) | --- | 0% (0/2)(0–84.1) | --- | 42.9% (3/7)(9.8–81.5) | 33.3% (3/9)(7.4–70.0) |
|
| ||||||||||
| VL(95% CI) | 66.7% (4/6)(22.2–95.6) | 100% (3/3)(29.2–100) | 0% (0/5)(0–52.1) | 35.7% (5/14)(12.7–64.8) | 42.9% (12/28)(24.4–62.8) | 0% (0/8)(0–36.9) | 50% (1/2)(1.2–98.7) | 0% (0/3)(0–70.7) | 42.9% (3/7)(9.8–81.5) | 20% (4/20)(5.7–43.6) |
| PKDL(95% CI) | --- | 0% (0/5)(0–52.2) | --- | 25.0% (15/60)(14.7–35.8) | 23.1% (15/65)(13.5–35.2) | --- | 0% (0/2)(0–84.1) | --- | 0% (0/7)(0–40.9) | 0% (0/9)(0–33.6) |
|
| ||||||||||
| VL(95% CI) | 78.9% (15/19)(54.4–93.9) | 66.7% (4/6)(22.2–95.6) | 100% (4/4)(39.7–100) | NA | 79.3% (23/29)(60.2–92.0) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| PKDL(95% CI) | --- | --- | --- | --- | ||||||
Efforts required for different ACD strategies.
| Round 1 | Round 2 | |||||||||
| SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'sinhB'desh | Overall | SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'sinhB'desh | Overall | |
| Mean # of new VL cases detected per camp | 0.26 | 0.14 | 0.83 | 0.6 | 0.36 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 0.50 | 0.14 | 0.23 |
| Mean # of new VL cases detected per index case | 0.05 | 0.05 | --- | 0.06 | 0.05 | --- | 0.06 | --- | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| # households screened to detect a new VL case | ||||||||||
| Index case based approach | 1000 | 967 | --- | 174 | 648 | --- | 800 | --- | 249 | 387 |
| Incentive based approach | 594 | 1888 | 1511 | NA | 978 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Blanket approach | 1326 | 2433 | 1234 | 654 | 1092 | 991 | 3672 | 1991 | 1305 | 1519 |
Direct costs of different ACD strategies.
| Round 1 | Round 2 | |||||||||
| SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'sinhB'desh | Overall | SaranIndia | M'purIndia | SarlahiNepal | M'sinhB'desh | Overall | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Training cost | 267 | 81.33 | 114 | 288.32 | 187.66 | 267 | 88.89 | 96.66 | 58.69 | 127.81 |
| Travel, Preparation cost | 2026 | 669.11 | 184 | 465.46 | 836.14 | 1982 | 595.56 | 168 | 394.74 | 785.07 |
| Allowance cost for camp | 1014 | 786.67 | 836 | 422.34 | 764.75 | 961 | 733.33 | 886.67 | 398.25 | 744.81 |
| Materials cost | 0 | 265.69 | 36 | 426.16 | 181.96 | 0 | 89.29 | 36 | 35.77 | 40.26 |
| Total (camp approach) | 3307 | 1802.80 | 1170 | 1602.30 | 1970.53 | 3210 | 1507.07 | 1187.33 | 887.50 | 1697.98 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Training cost | 93 | 0 | 14.60 | 35.86 | 93 | --- | --- | 11.68 | 52.34 | |
| Travel, Preparation cost | 333 | 176 | 353.77 | 287.59 | 333 | --- | --- | 311.60 | 322.30 | |
| Allowance cost for screening | 374 | 384 | 287.30 | 348.43 | 374 | --- | --- | 287.30 | 330.65 | |
| Materials cost | 0 | 2.67 | 89.60 | 30.75 | 0 | --- | --- | 26.32 | 13.16 | |
| Total (index case approach) | 800 | 572 | 562.65 | 745.53 | 702.72 | 800 | 309 | --- | 636.90 | 718.45 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Training cost | 511 | 181 | 793.33 | 495.11 | ||||||
| Travel, Preparation cost | 0 | 0 | 113.33 | 37.77 | ||||||
| Allowance cost for screening | 233 | 164 | 1032 | 476.33 | ||||||
| Materials cost | 0 | 35 | 234.67 | 89.89 | ||||||
| Total (incentive based approach) | 744 | 380 | 2173.33 | NA | 1099.11 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Training cost | 889 | 38 | 188 | 52.41 | 291.85 | 889 | 90.67 | 180 | 0 | 289.91 |
| Travel, Preparation cost | 1422 | 1776 | 97 | 1057.10 | 1088.03 | 1422 | 1866.67 | 95 | 219.71 | 900.84 |
| Allowance cost for screening | 933 | 7200 | 2834 | 1328.76 | 3073.94 | 933 | 2411.11 | 2926 | 646.42 | 1729.13 |
| Materials cost | 0 | 267 | 26 | 749.20 | 260.55 | 0 | 288.89 | 30 | 586.20 | 226.27 |
| Total (blanket approach) | 3244 | 9281 | 3145 | 3187.40 | 4714.35 | 3244 | 4657.33 | 3231 | 1452.33 | 3146.17 |
| Cost per new VL case detected (USD) | ||||||||||
| Camp approach | 661 | 21.72 | 234 | 178.03 | 273.68 | 642 | 22.83 | 395.78 | 443.75 | 376.09 |
| Index case based approach | 200 | 191 | --- | 149.10 | 180.03 | --- | --- | --- | 212.30 | 212.30 |
| Incentive based approach | 50 | 95 | 543.25 | NA | 229.41 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Blanket approach | 541 | 112 | 629 | 227.67 | 377.41 | 405 | 202.49 | 1077 | 207.47 | 472.99 |
| Cost per camp (USD) | 174 | 85.8 | 195 | 106.8 | 129.2 | 178.3 | 107.6 | 197.8 | 63.4 | 130.6 |
Detailed costs break up for Index case approach for Muzaffarpur, India not available.
Costs for Index case based approach for Nepal has been estimated over the entire study period and not by round.