NLR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021 Aug 23;15(8):e0009654. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009654. eCollection 2021 Aug.
Since ancient times leprosy has had a negative perception, resulting in stigmatization. To improve the lives of persons affected by leprosy, these negative perceptions need to change. The aim of this study is to evaluate interventions to change perceptions and improve knowledge of leprosy.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted a pre-post intervention study in Fatehpur and Chandauli districts, Uttar Pradesh, India. Based on six steps of quality intervention development (6SQuID) two interventions were designed: (1) posters that provided information about leprosy and challenged misconceptions, and (2) meetings with persons affected by leprosy, community members and influential people in the community. The effect of the interventions was evaluated in a mixed-methods design; in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and questionnaires containing a knowledge measure (KAP), two perception measures (EMIC-CSS, SDS) and an intervention evaluation tool. 1067 participants were included in Survey 1 and 843 in Survey 2. The interventions were effective in increasing knowledge of all participant groups, and in changing community and personal attitudes of close contacts and community members (changes of 19%, 24% and 13% on the maximum KAP, EMIC-CSS and SDS scores respectively, p<0.05). In Survey 1, 13% of participants had adequate knowledge of leprosy versus 53% in Survey 2. Responses showed stigmatizing community attitudes in 86% (Survey 1) and 61% (Survey 2) of participants and negative personal attitudes in 37% (Survey 1) and 19% (Survey 2). The number of posters seen was associated with KAP, EMIC-CSS and SDS scores in Survey 2 (p<0.001). In addition, during eight post-intervention focus group discussions and 48 interviews many participants indicated that the perception of leprosy in the community had changed.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Contextualized posters and community meetings were effective in changing the perception of leprosy and in increasing leprosy-related knowledge. We recommend studying the long-term effect of the interventions, also on behavior.
自古以来,麻风病一直存在负面看法,导致其被污名化。为了改善麻风病患者的生活,这些负面看法需要改变。本研究旨在评估改变看法和提高对麻风病认识的干预措施。
方法/主要发现:我们在印度北方邦法特普尔和钱达利区进行了一项干预前后研究。基于 6SQuID(质量干预开发的 6 个步骤)的 6 个步骤,设计了两种干预措施:(1)提供麻风病信息并挑战误解的海报;(2)与麻风病患者、社区成员和社区中有影响力的人举行会议。采用混合方法设计评估干预措施的效果;进行了深入访谈、焦点小组讨论和问卷调查,其中包含知识测量(KAP)、两个看法测量(EMIC-CSS、SDS)和干预评估工具。共有 1067 名参与者参加了调查 1,843 名参与者参加了调查 2。干预措施有效提高了所有参与者群体的知识,并改变了密切接触者和社区成员的社区和个人态度(最大 KAP、EMIC-CSS 和 SDS 得分分别提高 19%、24%和 13%,p<0.05)。在调查 1 中,13%的参与者对麻风病有足够的认识,而在调查 2 中,这一比例为 53%。调查结果显示,86%(调查 1)和 61%(调查 2)的参与者存在社区污名化态度,37%(调查 1)和 19%(调查 2)的参与者存在消极的个人态度。在调查 2 中,看到的海报数量与 KAP、EMIC-CSS 和 SDS 得分相关(p<0.001)。此外,在八次干预后焦点小组讨论和 48 次访谈中,许多参与者表示社区对麻风病的看法发生了变化。
结论/意义:有针对性的海报和社区会议有效改变了对麻风病的看法,并提高了与麻风病相关的知识。我们建议研究干预措施的长期效果,也包括行为方面。