HomeAboutusEditorial BoardCurrent issuearchivesSearch articlesInstructions for authorsSubscription detailsAdvertise

  Login  | Users online: 849

   Ahead of print articles    Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size  


 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Table of Contents   
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 46  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 657-661
Assessment of the impact of morbidity management and disability prevention for lymphatic filariasis on the disease burden in villupuram district of Tamil Nadu, India


1 Research Scholar, Division of Medical Entomology, ICMR-Regional Medical Research Centre, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India
2 Consultant, National Health Mission, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
3 ICMR-Vector Control Research Centre, Puducherry, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Lalit Kumar Das
National Health Mission, Bhubaneswar, Odisha
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijcm.IJCM_12_21

Rights and Permissions

Background: The global program to eliminate lymphatic filariasis (GPELF) was started in 2003 with two strategies: the mass drug administration (MDA) to interrupt disease transmission and the morbidity management and disability prevention (MMDP) to provide the basic hygienic care to filariasis lymphedema patients. Among the two strategies, the MDA is well advanced and got the desired results, but the MMDP is lagging due to poor execution. Objectives: To assess the awareness of MMDP and ongoing morbidity management practices by lymphedema patients and to estimate the impacts of the MMDP on the prevalence and severity of lymphedema. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted among 100 lymphedema patients in 7 filariasis endemic villages of Villupuram district, Tamil Nadu, India through interviews using a structured, pretested questionnaire. The grading and adenolymphangitis (ADL) attack determination were done by a clinician. The impact was assessed in terms of changes in the lymphedema grades, frequency of ADL attacks, and changes in the burden. Results: Of the 100 patients, 70% were aware of the program and among them, only 48% were practising MMDP regularly (i.e. two times per day). The majority of them (80%) were taking treatment during ADL attacks. The overall lymphedema grades reversal and progression were observed in 13% and 52% of cases, respectively. Conclusion: This study has revealed that the second arm of the GPELF, “MMDP” has not yielded the desired results as evidenced by the incidence of frequent ADL attacks and advancement of lymphedema grades.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article  Email this article
    

  Similar in PUBMED
    Search Pubmed for
    Search in Google Scholar for
  Related articles
   Citation Manager
  Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed342    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded73    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

  Sitemap | What's New | Feedback | Copyright and Disclaimer
  2007 - Indian Journal of Community Medicine | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
  Online since 15th September, 2007