| Literature DB >> 22216361 |
Lynne Michelle Zeldenryk1, Marion Gray, Richard Speare, Susan Gordon, Wayne Melrose.
Abstract
Globally, 40 million people live with the chronic effects of lymphatic filariasis (LF), making it the second leading cause of disability in the world. Despite this, there is limited research into the experiences of people living with the disease. This review summarises the research on the experiences of people living with LF disability. The review highlights the widespread social stigma and oppressive psychological issues that face most people living with LF-related disability. Physical manifestations of LF make daily activities and participation in community life difficult. The findings confirm the need for the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) to support morbidity management activities that address the complex biopsychosocial issues that people living with LF-related disability face.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22216361 PMCID: PMC3246437 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001366
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
The ICF model [13] presents a social model of health and functioning that is comprised of six inter-related domains: Health Condition, Body Functions and Structures, Activity, Participation, Environmental Factors, and Personal Factors. Health Condition refers to the presence/absence of a disorder or disease. Body Functions and Structure identifies the impact of physical bodily functioning on health. Within this model, health is seen to be not only the absence of a Health Condition, but also the individual's ability to complete daily Activities of necessity and their Participation in important life roles. Health and functioning is influenced by the existence of Environmental Factors (climactic environment, social attitudes, policies, services, etc.) that can be barriers or supports to health and functioning. Personal Factors (poverty, education level, gender, etc.) also influence health and functioning, depending on the environment a person lives within. Health and functioning is seen within this model as being not only an outcome of a health condition, but also of the other five domains that interact. Hence, health and functioning is seen to depend on context (Environment) and Personal Factors as much as the presence of a health condition and impaired body functions and structures. Finally, impairment is seen not only in terms of reduced bodily functions, but also in terms of a person's inability to complete daily activities and/or to participate in important life roles.
Summary of Articles Reviewed.
| Author & Topic | Design & Sample | Research Aim | Outcomes | Methodological Considerations | Identified Research Needs | Practice Implications |
|
|
| Investigate the impact of hydrocele and hydrocelectomy on pts, their household, and their community. | Hydrocele negatively impacts daily activities, relationships, and social interactions, all of which hydrocelectomy minimises. | Triangulation and cross checking utilised. Minimal consideration of theoretical perspective and researcher bias. Saturation of data not recorded. | Need for further research into hydrocele management practices. | Need for hydrocele management and education within LF morbidity programs. Greater access to low-cost hydrocelectomy has potential to significantly benefit individuals and communities. |
|
|
| Investigate health beliefs and perceptions of LF to inform health education programs. | Elephantiasis seen as shameful and ADL most dreaded issue. Hydrocele not believed linked to other LF presentations.Various misconceptions about cause and management strategies. | Breadth of sample and therefore perspectives included in study. Minimal consideration of theoretical perspective and researcher bias. Saturation of data not recorded. | Investigation into site-specific health beliefs and perceptions necessary for culturally relevant health education programs. | Health education should include and build upon local health perceptions. |
|
|
| To explore impact of hydrocele on sexual functioning and marriageability from pts' and wives' perspectives. | Hydrocele has significant impact on sexual functioning, relationships, and marriageability.Hydrocelectomy known about but not accessed due to cost. | Clear study design, methodological considerations and limitations identified. Minimisation of bias through cross checking and team approach to research. Saturation of data not recorded. | Further research into incidence and impact of hydrocele globally.Research links between MDA and incidence of hydrocele. | Lack of research currently minimises hydrocele as intervention priority. Need for access to low-cost hydrocelectomy to increase uptake.Need for psychological and social interventions for hydrocele. |
|
|
| To investigate the impact of LF for women and children and how they understand and manage the condition | Chronic LF has significant impact on productivity, socialisation, relationships.Women less likely to seek treatment. Education at school raised children's understanding of LF. | Methodological approaches vague. Data analysis not described and findings blurred with literature in results. Author's theoretical position and role in research not acknowledged, trustworthiness of research difficult to ascertain. | Further research into gender-specific issues of LF.Further research into genital oedema and impact on sexual functioning and childbirth for women. | Need for women to have greater involvement in control programmes. Community-based approach to health (schools, fairs) essential for women and children to access LF education and management. |
|
|
| Investigate local understanding of disease, impact of lymphoedema on women's daily lives, and preferred treatment strategies. | Limited understanding of LF aetiology. Lymphoedema limits a range of daily activities (work, self care, care for others, education). Acute attacks leave women reliant on others for care. Need for women to talk with others with condition. | Triangulation of data and a team of experienced researchers increase trustworthiness. Poor description of site of research, limiting transferability of findings. Saturation of data, informed consent, and theoretical perspective of researchers not recorded. | None stated; however, research findings indicate greater research into community perceptions of disease could inform culturally relevant health promotion activities relating to LF. | Need for greater health promotion education on cause and treatment of LF.Women identified strong need for social support programmes, where women can meet others in similar situation as their own and reduce feelings of isolation. |
|
|
| Investigate the social and economic impact of hydrocele for men with LF. | Hydrocele has negative impact on work, sexual functioning, socialisation, and marriageability.Men desired but feared hydrocelectomy. | Development of methods in consultation with community and triangulation of data are strengths. Minimal discussion of key informants. Saturation of data not recorded. | Greater research into psychological impact of LF associated disability.Research into gender-specific elements and impact of LF disability. | Need for gender-specific health education and interventions for LF morbidity programs. |
|
|
| Investigate the social and economic impact of filarial elephantiasis from the perspective of those with the disease. | Poverty has great impact on disease progression (delay in seeking treatment, poorer hygiene in the home, occupations that exacerbate condition). Stigma and psychological distress experienced by all, regardless of income. | Clear study design with sampling and auditing process well described. Minimisation of bias through cross checking and team approach to research. Saturation of data not recorded. | Need for LF-specific assessments that classify more than physical impairment.Ongoing need to survey lymphoedema and hydrocele patients within endemic communities to justify expenditure on morbidity management programs. | Need for expansion of lymphoedema treatment programs, informed by local survey statistics.Lymphoedema interventions need to consider social and economic constraints. Need for poverty reduction strategies as part of intervention. |
|
|
| Investigate the health beliefs, behaviours, and self care of women with lymphoedema. | Cultural practices strongly influenced health-seeking behaviour.All women sought multiple methods for lymphoedema management. | Clear study design with sampling and auditing process well described. Author's theoretical position and role in research not acknowledged, could bias theory development. | Investigation of health beliefs and perceptions necessary to assist planning of culturally relevant health programs. | Family-centred health strategies important for effective lymphoedema management.Training local healers has potential to increase widespread community understanding of LF. |
|
|
| To identify a) the factors that impact SC and b) the impact of disrupted SC for women with LF. | Age, disease stage, social role, and supports influenced SC. Disrupted SC led to poor health, psychological issues, and social isolation. | Comprehensive data collection and analysis, eliciting clear theory and description of SC. Author's theoretical position and role in research not acknowledged, could bias theory development. | Social science research into the impact on LF on SC.Investigation of the age and stages of LF and relative impact on SC. | Potential need for LF programmes to include social and behavioural interventions in addition to medical approaches. |
|
|
| To investigate the psychological state of women with chronic LF and the coping strategies they use. | Shame, depression, social isolation, and hopelessness common for women with all stages of lymphoedema. Self-devised coping strategies helped some women. | Methodological approaches clearly described. Triangulation allowed in depth exploration of issues. Author's role and theoretical position not acknowledged; however, bias minimised with data collection protocols and peer checking. | Development of disability measurement tools that incorporate both physical and psychological impacts of LF (possibly gender specific). | Psychological interventions crucial for LF programs. Use of established cultural supports and LF-specific support groups may be beneficial to maintaining social networks and coping strategies. |
|
|
| To investigate the health-related stigma for women living with chronic LF-related lymphoedema. | Women with LF experience enacted, perceived, and internalised health-related stigma. Impact of stigma influenced by social context, personal factors. | Triangulation allowed in depth exploration of issues. Emerging theory well discussed and described. Author's theoretical position and role in research not acknowledged, could bias theory development. | Need for further research into the impact of LF for women, particularly in regard to stigma and QOL. Further research into cross-cultural studies of LF related stigma. | Potential need for LF programmes to include social and behavioural interventions in addition to medical approaches. |
|
|
| To investigate the functional limitations associated with the different stages of LF. | LF can limit or prevents active engagement in work and domestic tasks.Functional impairment is greatest in acute stages. | Breadth of sample and therefore perspectives included in study. Triangulation of data. Minimal discussion of researcher bias/theoretical framework. Saturation of data not recorded. | Need for reliable and accurate data on LF-related disability to advocate as significant public health issue.Further research into ADL aetiology, impact, and management also required. | None stated. However, results would indicate need for LF programs to incorporate rehabilitation services for to reduce disability and functional impairment caused by LF. |
|
|
| To investigate perceptions and impact of disability on the social lives, marriageability, and productivity of people living with LF. | Later stages of lymphoedema greatly affected work and married life. Stigma greatly felt within community and depression common. | Breadth of sample and therefore perspectives included in study. Minimal discussion of researcher bias/theoretical framework; however, bias minimised by team approach and pre-testing survey. Saturation of data not recorded. | Economic studies into monetary loss associated with LF disability required.Further research into how people can identify early manifestations of disease required to identify and prevent LF disability early. | Health education targeting children required for early intervention.Collaboration with local healers may increase access to LF interventions. Family involvement in disability management may ↑ outcomes. Self-help groups may reduce impact of stigma. |
Figure 2The impact of LF: an adapted ICF model.
Figure 2 is an adaptation of the original ICF model [13] outlined in Figure 1. This model shows that the impact of LF is dependent on the interaction of a number of domains within the ICF. The impact of LF is dependent on the impact of the disease on body functions and structures and the level of impairment present. However, the impact of LF is also dependent on the person's environment, which can either facilitate good health (i.e., presence of LF programs within the community) or create a barrier to good health (i.e., the presence of social stigma within the community that prevents people with LF from accessing proper treatment). The impact of LF is seen also in terms of how the disease prevents people from completing daily activities and from participating in major life roles and community events. Finally, LF impact is influenced by personal factors such as poverty, gender, and age. This model shows how these elements (Body Function and Structure, Activity and Participation, Environment and Personal Factors) interact to determine the impact of LF for an individual living with the disease. Hence, LF programs that target solely the body structures and functions level only address one domain and do not respond to other factors that influence the overall impact of LF for a person. Interventions that also address environmental barriers, support re-engagement within daily activities and community participation, and respond to personal needs are theorised to have the greatest impact on the experience of LF for an individual.