Background Understanding how knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding leprosy differ in endemic countries can help us develop targeted educational and behavioural change interventions. This study aimed to examine the differences and commonalities in and determinants of knowledge, attitudes, practices and fears regarding leprosy in endemic districts in India and Indonesia. Principle findings A cross-sectional mixed-methods design was used. Persons affected by leprosy, their close contacts, community members and health workers were included. Through interview-administered questionnaires we assessed knowledge, attitudes, practices and fears with the KAP measure, EMIC-CSS and SDS. In addition, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The quantitative data were analysed using stepwise multivariate regression. Determinants of knowledge and stigma that were examined included age, gender, participant type, education, occupation, knowing someone affected by leprosy and district. The qualitative data were analysed using open, inductive coding and content analysis. We administered questionnaires to 2344 participants (46% from India, 54% from Indonesia) as an interview. In addition, 110 participants were interviewed in-depth and 60 participants were included in focus group discussions. Knowledge levels were low in both countries: 88% of the participants in India and 90% of the participants in Indonesia had inadequate knowledge of leprosy. In both countries, cause, mode of transmission, early symptoms and contagiousness of leprosy was least known, and treatment and treatability of leprosy was best known. In both countries, health workers had the highest leprosy knowledge levels and community members the highest stigma levels (a mean score of up to 17.4 on the EMIC-CSS and 9.1 on the SDS). Data from the interviews indicated that people were afraid of being infected by leprosy. Local beliefs and misconceptions differed, for instance that leprosy is in the family for seven generations (Indonesia) or that leprosy is a result of karma (India). The determinants of leprosy knowledge and stigma explained 10–29% of the variability in level of knowledge and 3–10% of the variability in level of stigma. Conclusion Our findings show the importance of investigating the perceptions regarding leprosy prior to educational interventions in communities: even though knowledge levels were similar, local beliefs and misconceptions differed per setting. The potential determinants we included in our study explained very little of the variability in level of knowledge and stigma and should be explored further. Detailed knowledge of local knowledge gaps, beliefs and fears can help tailor health education to local circumstances.

A key issue for persons with leprosy-, lymphatic filariasis- and podoconiosis-related disabilities is the life-long need to practice self-management routines. This is difficult to sustain without regular encouragement and support of others. Family-based support may be a sustainable and feasible strategy to practice self-management routines. This proof of concept study aimed to develop and pilot a family-based intervention to support prevention and self-management of leprosy, lymphatic filariasis and podoconiosis-related disabilities in Ethiopia. We used a quasi-experimental pre/post intervention study design with a mixed methods approach. The study population included persons affected by leprosy, lymphatic filariasis and podoconiosis and their family members. All persons affected had visible impairments due to their condition. We collected physical impairment outcomes, data on activity limitations, stigma and family quality of life using the SALSA scale (range 0–80), the SARI stigma scale (range 0–63) and the Beach Centre Family Quality of Life scale (range 0–125) and conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Quantitative data were analysed using paired t-tests, unequal variances t-tests, linear regression and binary logistic regression. Qualitative data were coded using open, inductive coding and content analysis. The family-based intervention consisted of self-management of disabilities, awareness raising and socio-economic empowerment. The intervention was delivered over several monthly group meetings over the course of several months. A total of 275 (100%) persons affected attended at least one session with a family member, and 215 (78%) attended at least three sessions. There was no significant improvement in eye and hand problems after the intervention. However, foot and leg impairments, number of acute attacks, lymphedema and shoe wearing all significantly improved at follow-up. In addition, family quality of life significantly improved from 67.4 at baseline to 89.9 at follow-up for family members and from 76.9 to 84.1 for persons affected (p<0.001). Stigma levels significantly decreased from 24.0 at baseline to 16.7 at follow-up (p<0.001). Activity levels improved, but not significantly. This proof of concept study showed that the family-based intervention had a positive effect on impairments and self-management of disabilities, family quality of life and stigma. We recommend a large-scale efficacy trial, using a randomised controlled trial and validated measurement tools, to determine its effectiveness and long-term sustainability.

Background Leprosy and leprosy-related stigma can have a major impact on psychosocial wellbeing of persons affected and their family members. Resilience is a process that incorporates many of the core skills and abilities which may enable people to address stigma and discrimination. The current study aimed to develop and pilot an intervention to strengthen individual and family resilience against leprosy-related discrimination. Methodology We used a quasi-experimental, before-after study design with a mixed methods approach. The 10-week family-based intervention was designed to strengthen the resilience of individuals and families by enhancing their protective abilities and capacity to overcome adversity. The study was conducted in two sites, urban areas in Telangana state, and in rural areas in Odisha state, India. Persons affected and their family members were included using purposive sampling. Two questionnaires were used pre-and post-intervention: the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC, maximum score 100, with high scores reflecting greater resilience) and the WHOQOL-BREF (maximum score of 130, with higher scores reflecting higher quality of life). In addition, semi-structured interviews were conducted post-intervention. Data were collected at baseline, a few weeks after completion of the intervention, and in the Odisha cohort again at six months after completion. Paired t-tests measured differences pre- and post- intervention. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Findings Eighty participants across 20 families were included in the study (23 persons affected and 57 family members). We found a significant increase in CD-RISC scores for persons affected and family members from Odisha state (baseline 46.5, first follow-up 77.0, second follow-up 70.0), this improvement was maintained at six-month follow-up. There was no increase in CD-RISC scores post-intervention among participants from Telangana state. WHOQOL-BREF scores were significantly higher at follow-up for persons affected in both states, and for family members in Odisha state. No families dropped out of the study. In the qualitative feedback, all participants described drawing benefit from the programme. Participants especially appreciated the social dimensions of the intervention. Conclusion This pilot study showed that the 10-week family-based intervention to strengthen resilience among persons affected by leprosy and their family members was feasible, and has the potential to improve resilience and quality of life. A large-scale efficacy trial is necessary to determine the effectiveness and long-term sustainability of the intervention.