Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obervation Letter
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
Original Article
2002:68:3;133-135
PMID: 17656908

Impact of MDT on leprosy with a special reference to monolesions and smear positivity among the new cases

B Nanda Kishore
 Department of Skin, VD and Leprosy, Fr Muller's Medical College, Kankanady, Mangalore 575 002, India

Correspondence Address:
B Nanda Kishore
Department of Skin, VD and Leprosy, Fr Muller's Medical College, Kankanady, Mangalore 575 002
India
How to cite this article:
Nanda Kishore B. Impact of MDT on leprosy with a special reference to monolesions and smear positivity among the new cases. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2002;68:133-135
Copyright: (C)2002 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology

Abstract

The impact of MDT on the prevalence and incidence rate of leprosy was studied in a project area of 1,30,000 population over a period of 14 years, with a special reference to new monolesional cases and those presenting as smear positive cases. The prevalence rate showed a fall from 23 per 10,000 in 1986-87 to 1.33 per 10,000 in 1999-2000. The number of cases presenting with single lesion however showed a downward trend from 63.69% in 1986-87 to 26.09% in 1999-2000. The cases showing smear positivity among the new cases detected showed an ascent from 3.91 % in 1986-87 to 4.35% in 1999-2000 with a peak of 25% in 1995-96. A similar trend was seen in the analysed figures of the 4 general surveys done.
Keywords: Leprosy, Incidence, Prevalence

Introduction

St Joseph′s Leprosy Hospital, a unit of Fr Muller′s Charitable Institutions started the Leprosy control programme in an area of 1 lakh population near Mangalore, South India in 1986. This population was found to have increased to 1,35,000 in 1993-94. All the cases in the project area were brought under MDT as per Government of India Guidelines.[1] In the study we are presenting the impact of MDT as observed through various epidemiological indices. We have given a special emphasis on the proportion of new cases presenting as monolesional cases and the proportion of smear positive cases.

Materials and Methods

All the cases detected in the area were registered and a detailed clinical and bacteriological examination was done. The records had been maintained meticulously which enabled us to go through it and get the necessary statistical details. The following details were obtained from the records.

1. Number of existing cases on treatment at the end of the reporting year (1st April to 31st March)

2. Number of new cases detected during the reporting year.

3. Clinical details like number of lesions and smear status.

4. Number of new cases detected in a completed survey and the clinical details of such cases.

Observation and Result

The prevalence rate showed a gradual decline from 23 per 10,000 in 1986-87 to 1.33 per 10.000 in 1999-2000.

The incidence rate is calculated on the basis of the number of new cases detected in a year provided one full round of survey should have been completed in that year. As it took us about 3 years to complete a round of survey, we are giving the number of new cases detected from 179 in 1986-87 to 23 in 1999-2000. This decline is also seen in [Table - 2] where 366 new cases detected in the first survey has come down to 91 in the fourth survey, and then to 30 in the fifth incompleted survey which covered 64,731 people.

The number of cases with monolesions among the newly detected cases shows some variations [Table - 1] [Figure - 1]. It ranges from 63.69% in 1986-87 to 26.09% in 1999-2000.

The number of cases with smear positivity though initially has shown a decline from 3.91 % in 1986-87 to nil in 1988-89 has then slowly ascended from 1.52% in 1989-90 to 25% in 1995-96 and descended to 4.35% in 1999-2000. [Table - 1], [Figure - 2]. This gradual increase in the smear positive cases is also seen in [Table - 2] where it has gone up from 2.19% in the 1st survey to 8.79% in the 4th survey.

Discussion

The shorter duration of treatment with MDT has shown its effect on the prevalence rate. It has declined gradually from 23 per 10,000 in 1986-87 to 1.33 per 10,000 in 1999-2000. The number of cases- detected every year also shows a similar trend being 179 in 1986-87 and 18 in 1999-2000. The same pattern is seen in the 4 completed surveys. 366 new cases detected in the first survey has come down to 91 in the fourth survey.

We are giving a special emphasis on the monolesions and smear positive cases among the newly detected cases. The number of cases the leprosy control with MDT progresses.[2] In our study the percentage of newly detected cases in a year presenting with monolesions has come down slowly from 63.69% in 1986-87 to 60.78% in 1990-91 and then shows a sudden fall to 32.08% in 1991-92 and then gradually reaching 26.09% in 1999-2000. This trend is also seen in the completed surveys where the percentage has come down from 55.46% in first survey to 34.07% in the fourth survey.

The percentage of smear positive cases is known to decrease with the advancement of MDT programme.[3],[4] In our study the percentage of new cases with smear positivity showed a gradual ascent from 3.91 % in 1986-87 to 25% in 1995-96 and a fall to 4.35% in 1999-2000. The sudden rise in the percentage from 11.54% in 1994-95 to 25% in 1995-96 is difficult to explain. This trend is also seen in the completed surveys. From 2.19% in the first survey the percentage has gone up to 8.79% in the fourth survey.

References
1.
National Leprosy Eradication Programme in India 1987: Directorate General of Health Service, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, Page 9.
[Google Scholar]
2.
Jesudasan K, Vijayakumaran K, Pannikar VK, et al. Impact of MDT on leprosy as measured by selective indicators. Lepr Rev 1988;59:215-223.
[Google Scholar]
3.
Paotricia Rose. Change in the epidemiological indices following the introduction of WHO-MDT into the Guyana Leprosy Control Programme. Lepr Rev 1989;60:151-156.
[Google Scholar]
4.
Rangaraj M, Rangaraj J. Experience with multi-drug therapy in Sierra Leone: clinical, operational and managerial analysis: Lepr Rev 1986;57:Supplement 3, 77-91.
[Google Scholar]
Show Sections