RESUMO
The city of Bombay with its teeming eight million citizens is characterised by varied types of living pattern in its different parts and the approach to leprosy control work should be flexible to suit these facets of living conditions. Earlier reports (Ganapati and Girija 1979) have indicated the possibility of the successful application of techniques based on mass surveys in North Bombay where people belonging to low socio-economic strata live in somewhat organised slums or shanty towns. However, extreme South Bombay is marked by the paucity of such vast slums and one is struck by the more permanent multistoreyed housing structures. Living in commercial establishments as well as footpath dwelling are common. This presentation consists of an attempt to gauge the leprosy problems in this part of the city taking advantage of 425 patients registered at a leprosy clinic run in conjunction with the dermatology out patient department of a big general hospital over a period of 40 months. 212 cases (50%) hailing from South Bombay proper were the subject matter for analysis. 66% (140) belonged to progressive types of leprosy classifiable as BT through LL and of the Ridley-Jopling classification and 30.7% were bacteriologically positive. 42.9% of the patients had some degree of deformity. Males formed 80% of the sample and 76% were above 15 years of age. Analysis of duration of residence revealed that 68% were living in Bombay for over six years and 53.5% were residing in the city for 11 years or more. This finding is contrary to the expectation of leprosy patients in Bombay belonging to a "floating population". Attempts at field work revealed the following findings: Slum pockets being few (only four), patients were expected to live in residential buildings; but it was found that 25% of population were staying in work places. 17% were footpath dwellers and 18.9% shared their accommodation with people other than family members. 10.4% were domestic servants staying in the residences of their employees. The labour class constituted 50.5% the unemployed housewives group formed 21.7% and beggers 0.9%. 4.2% only were slum dwellers. Locating and examining contacts of patients was difficult as 42.9% could not be traced owing to faulty addresses or patients having changed residences or shifted to native places. Of the 111 patients (52.3%) contacted, 26.4% were living with families and 26.1% were staying alone or with others.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)