Our study found a significant delay in diagnosis of leprosy in north-eastern Colombia, which might explain the continuously high rate of DG2 among new cases being notified in the country. Both patient- and health system-related factors were associated with longer diagnostic delay. Interventions to increase awareness of disease among the general population and timely referral to a specialised health professional are urgently needed in our study setting.

Abstract Background Leprosy, cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) and Chagas disease (CD) are neglected tropical diseases with a high psychosocial burden (PSB). These conditions are endemic in Norte de Santander and Arauca in Colombia, but data on the related PSB are scarce. Therefore, we assessed mental distress, participation restriction and stigma among CD, CL and leprosy patients. Methods In 2018, 305 leprosy, CD or CL patients were interviewed using a self-report questionnaire to assess mental distress, participation scale for participation restriction and explanatory model interview catalogue (EMIC) for stigma. Descriptive statistics and the significance of median score differences were compared. Results Fifty percent of CD patients and 49% of leprosy patients exhibited mental distress, percentages which were significantly higher than that of CL (26%). Twenty-seven percent of leprosy patients experienced participation restriction, which was lower for CL (6%) and CD (12%). Median EMIC scores were significantly higher for leprosy patients than for CD (27%) and CL (17%) patients. Conclusions We found high levels of PSB among leprosy, CD and CL patients. Mental distress was highest among CD patients. Participation restriction and stigma were more prevalent in leprosy patients. Rural residence or lower educational status may impact PSB. Further investigation is needed to formulate evidence-based, holistic interventions.

BackgroundMany neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are not fatal, but they are disabling, disfiguring and stigmatizing. More accurate data on these aspects would benefit planning, monitoring and evaluation of interventions, as well as provision of appropriate services for the often life-long consequences. In 2015, a cross-NTD toolkit was developed, consisting of a variety of existing questionnaires to measure morbidity, disability and health-related quality of life. The toolkit covers the domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. These tools have been developed in a source country, however, it was intended for the cross-NTD toolkit to be applicable across NTDs in many countries with different cultures and languages in order to generate universally comparative data. Therefore; the present study aimed to validate several tools of the toolkit among people affected by leprosy or leishmaniasis in the cultural settings of Cartagena and Cúcuta, Colombia.MethodologyThis study aimed to validate the following tools among 55 participants between 18–85 years old, affected by leprosy and leishmaniasis: (I) Clinical Profile, (II) Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ), (III) WHO Quality of Life assessment-abbreviated version (WHOQOL-BREF), and (IV) WHO Quality of Life assessment-Disability (WHOQOL-DIS). The tools were administered during face-to-face interviews and were followed by open questions about the respondents’ thoughts on format of the tool and the understanding, relevance and acceptability of the items. The tools were validated using a qualitative method approach based on the framework for cultural equivalence, measured by the cultural, item, semantic and operational equivalences.ResultsThe Clinical Profile was seen as acceptable and relevant, only the semantic equivalence was not as satisfying and needs a few adaptations. The SRQ was very well understood and shows to reach the equivalences for the population of Colombia without any additional changes. Several items of the WHOQOL-BREF and the WHOQOL-DIS were not well understood and changes are recommended due to semantic difficulties. Operational equivalence of both questionnaires was not as desired in relation to the used response scales. The participants shared that the tools are relevant and important for their particular situation.Conclusions/SignificanceThe SRQ is found to be a valid tool for Colombia and can be included in the cross-NTD toolkit. The Clinical Profile, WHOQOL-BREF & WHOQOL-DIS need changes and retesting among Colombian people affected by an NTD. The toolkit as a whole is seen as useful to show the effects leprosy and leishmaniasis have on the participants. This cultural validation will contribute to a universally applicable cross-NTD toolkit.

No abstract

No abstract