Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Add filters

Main subject
Document Type
Year range
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e046125, 2021 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376488


INTRODUCTION: Leprosy, or Hansen's disease, remains a cause of preventable disability. Early detection, treatment and prevention are key to reducing transmission. Post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDR-PEP) reduces the risk of developing leprosy when administered to screened contacts of patients. This has been adopted in the WHO leprosy guidelines. The PEP4LEP study aims to determine the most effective and feasible method of screening people at risk of developing leprosy and administering chemoprophylaxis to contribute to interrupting transmission. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PEP4LEP is a cluster-randomised implementation trial comparing two interventions of integrated skin screening combined with SDR-PEP distribution to contacts of patients with leprosy in Ethiopia, Mozambique and Tanzania. One intervention is community-based, using skin camps to screen approximately 100 community contacts per leprosy patient, and to administer SDR-PEP when eligible. The other intervention is health centre-based, inviting household contacts of leprosy patients to be screened in a local health centre and subsequently receive SDR-PEP when eligible. The mobile health (mHealth) tool SkinApp will support health workers' capacity in integrated skin screening. The effectiveness of both interventions will be compared by assessing the rate of patients with leprosy detected and case detection delay in months, as well as feasibility in terms of cost-effectiveness and acceptability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the national ethical committees of Ethiopia (MoSHE), Mozambique (CNBS) and Tanzania (NIMR/MoHCDEC). Study results will be published open access in peer-reviewed journals, providing evidence for the implementation of innovative leprosy screening methods and chemoprophylaxis to policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL7294 (NTR7503).

Leprosy , Ethiopia , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Leprosy/diagnosis , Leprosy/drug therapy , Leprosy/prevention & control , Mozambique , Tanzania
Infect Drug Resist ; 13: 3751-3761, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-895191


BACKGROUND: Ethiopia has taken strict preventive measures against COVID-19 to control its spread, to protect citizens, and ensure their wellbeing. Employee's adherence to preventive measures is influenced by their knowledge, perceived susceptibility, severity, benefit, barrier, cues to action, and self-efficacy. Therefore, this study investigated the predictors of COVID-19 prevention practice using the Health Belief Model among employees in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2020. METHODS: Multicentre cross-sectional study design was used. A total of 628 employees selected by systematic sampling method were included in this study. Data were collected using a pretested self-administered questionnaire. Summary statistics of a given data for each variable were calculated. Logistic regression model was used to measure the association between the outcome and the predictor variable. Statistical significance was declared at p-value<0.05. Direction and strength of association were expressed using OR and 95% CI. RESULTS: From a total of 628 respondents, 432 (68.8%) of them had poor COVID-19 prevention practice. Three hundred ninety-one (62.3%), 337 (53.7%), 312 (49.7), 497 (79.1%), 303 (48.2%) and 299 (52.4%) of the respondents had high perceived susceptibility, severity, benefit, barrier, cues to action and self-efficacy to COVID-19 prevention practice, respectively. Employees with a low level of perceived barriers were less likely to have a poor practice of COVID-19 prevention compared to employees with a high level of perceived barrier [AOR = 0.03, 95% CI (0.01,0.05)]. Similarly, employees with low cues to action and employees with a low level of self-efficacy were practiced COVID prevention measures to a lesser extent compared those with high cues to action and high level of self-efficacy [AOR = 0.05, 95% CI (0.026,0.10)] and [AOR = 0.08, 95% CI (0.04,0.14)], respectively. CONCLUSION: The proportion of employees with poor COVID-19 prevention was high. Income, perceived barrier, cues to action, and self-efficacy were significantly associated with COVID-19 prevention practice.