• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

麻风病患者中多学科诊疗(MDT)违约的相关因素

Correlates of Defaulting from MDT among Leprosy Patients.

作者信息

Raju M S, Elkana M, Failbus P, Palla J P, Hembrom U K, Rao P S

出版信息

Indian J Lepr. 2016 Sep;87(4):241-248.

PMID:29762953
Abstract

In order to analyse the factors of demographic as well as disease related variables and their correlation with Rate of Defaulting (ROD) from Multi Drug Therapy (MDT) among leprosy patients, secondary data have been collected from 3,579 new cases registered for MDT, during a period of 4 years from 2007 to 2010 in four leprosy hospitals/ treatment centers across the four high endemic states viz. Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh; Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. Year wise percentage of patients defaulted was calculated on aggregate as well as with reference to each centre and cross tabulated with demographic and disease related factors. Findings show that out of the total 3,579 new cases, 1944,(54.3%) defaulted with variation across centers ranged from 44 to 66 percent. Comparison of ROD against type of leprosy indicated that MB types defaulted (55.7%) more than PB (50.6%) types, (statistically significant difference, (p=0,04). ROD of male patients across the centers ranged from 45% to 67.7% in comparison with 42.4% to 61.5% of female patients. A-statistically significant difference (p=6.04) was found between the overall ROD of males (56.35%) and females (51.47%). The ROD among those with more severe disabilities (WHO Gr-2) ranged between 44% to 67.5% across the centers, while the same among those'with less severe disabilities (Gr-0&1) ranged from 42.6 to 72.7 percent. Comparison of ROD against severity of disability was found statistically significant only across 2 centers. No statistically significant variation was found when ROD of adult patients with refeince to each centr ranged between (43.6% to 65.4%) was compared with the same of children ranged beeIen (36.2% to 69.3%). Across each of these categories and centers,'the ROD remained consistent over the ,4 years. Based on the above findings'this may be concluded that male sex and MB types are significant correlates of default from treatment. Severity of disabilities plays significant role only in certain areas, probably due to other interfering factors, which needs to be further investiged.

摘要

为了分析麻风病患者的人口统计学因素、疾病相关变量及其与多药联合治疗(MDT)违约率(ROD)的相关性,我们收集了2007年至2010年这4年间,在北方邦、恰蒂斯加尔邦、马哈拉施特拉邦和安得拉邦这四个麻风病高发邦的四家麻风病医院/治疗中心登记接受MDT治疗的3579例新病例的二手数据。按年份计算了患者违约的总体百分比以及各中心的违约百分比,并与人口统计学和疾病相关因素进行交叉制表。研究结果显示,在总共3579例新病例中,有1944例(54.3%)违约,各中心的违约率在44%至66%之间。将ROD与麻风病类型进行比较表明,多菌型(MB)的违约率(55.7%)高于少菌型(PB)(50.6%),(差异具有统计学意义,(p = 0.04)。各中心男性患者的ROD在45%至67.7%之间,而女性患者的ROD在42.4%至61.5%之间。男性(56.35%)和女性(51.47%)的总体ROD之间存在统计学显著差异(p = 0.04)。残疾程度较重(世界卫生组织二级)的患者各中心的ROD在44%至67.5%之间,而残疾程度较轻(0级和1级)的患者的ROD在42.6%至72.7%之间。将ROD与残疾严重程度进行比较,仅在2个中心发现有统计学显著差异。将各中心成年患者(43.6%至65.4%)的ROD与儿童患者(36.2%至69.3%)的ROD进行比较时,未发现统计学显著差异。在这些类别和中心中,4年期间ROD保持一致。基于上述研究结果,可以得出结论,男性和多菌型是治疗违约的重要相关因素。残疾严重程度仅在某些地区起重要作用,可能是由于其他干扰因素,这需要进一步调查。

相似文献

1
Correlates of Defaulting from MDT among Leprosy Patients.麻风病患者中多学科诊疗(MDT)违约的相关因素
Indian J Lepr. 2016 Sep;87(4):241-248.
2
Epidemiological shift in leprosy in a rural district of central India following introduction of multi-drug therapy (April 1986 to March 1992 and April 1992 to March 2002).印度中部某农村地区在引入多药联合疗法后麻风病的流行病学转变(1986年4月至1992年3月以及1992年4月至2002年3月)
Lepr Rev. 2005 Jun;76(2):112-8.
3
What stops people completing multi-drug therapy? Ranked perspectives of people with leprosy, their head of family and neighbours--across four Indian states.是什么阻碍人们完成多药疗法?麻风病患者、其家庭成员及邻居的排序观点——来自印度四个邦
Lepr Rev. 2015 Mar;86(1):6-20.
4
Need and strategy for sentinel surveillance for drug resistance in leprosy in India.印度麻风病耐药性哨点监测的需求与策略
Indian J Lepr. 2009 Jul-Sep;81(3):113-8.
5
A study on non-adherence to MDT among leprosy patients.一项关于麻风病患者对联合化疗不依从性的研究。
Indian J Lepr. 2008 Apr-Jun;80(2):149-54.
6
WHO multidrug therapy for leprosy: epidemiology of default in treatment in Agra district, Uttar Pradesh, India.世界卫生组织的麻风病联合化疗:印度北方邦阿格拉地区治疗中断的流行病学情况
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:705804. doi: 10.1155/2015/705804. Epub 2015 Feb 1.
7
Patient profile and treatment satisfaction of Brazilian leprosy patients in a clinical trial of uniform six-month multidrug therapy (U-MDT/CT-BR).在一项统一六个月多药疗法(U-MDT/CT-BR)临床试验中巴西麻风病患者的患者概况及治疗满意度
Lepr Rev. 2014 Dec;85(4):267-74.
8
Nerve function impairment in leprosy at diagnosis and at completion of MDT: a retrospective cohort study of 786 patients in Bangladesh.麻风病诊断时及多药联合化疗结束时的神经功能损害:孟加拉国786例患者的回顾性队列研究
Lepr Rev. 1996 Dec;67(4):297-305. doi: 10.5935/0305-7518.19960030.
9
Epidemiological trends of leprosy in an urban leprosy centre of Delhi: a retrospective study of 16 years.德里一个城市麻风病中心的麻风病流行病学趋势:一项为期16年的回顾性研究
Indian J Lepr. 2011 Oct-Dec;83(4):201-8.
10
Comparative study of uniform-MDT and WHO MDT in Pauci and Multi bacillary leprosy patients over 24 months of observation.对少菌型和多菌型麻风患者进行24个月观察,比较统一多学科团队治疗(uniform-MDT)与世界卫生组织多学科团队治疗(WHO MDT)的研究。
Lepr Rev. 2009 Jun;80(2):143-55.

引用本文的文献

1
Drug Resistance in in the Context of Zero Leprosy.零麻风背景下的耐药性
Indian Dermatol Online J. 2021 Nov 22;12(6):791-795. doi: 10.4103/idoj.idoj_599_21. eCollection 2021 Nov-Dec.
2
Profile of Defaulters and Pattern of Treatment Default among Leprosy Patients at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A 10-Year Analysis.三级护理医院麻风病患者违约者概况及治疗违约模式:一项10年分析
Indian Dermatol Online J. 2020 May 10;11(3):355-360. doi: 10.4103/idoj.IDOJ_393_19. eCollection 2020 May-Jun.
3
Geographic and socioeconomic factors associated with leprosy treatment default: An analysis from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort.
与麻风病治疗中断相关的地理和社会经济因素:来自 1 亿巴西队列的分析。
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019 Sep 6;13(9):e0007714. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007714. eCollection 2019 Sep.