BMC public health · 2020
Is leishmaniasis adequately notified in Sri Lanka? A survey among doctors from an endemic district, Sri Lanka.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hewawasam Chandana, Weerakoon Hema S, Thilakan Vyshnavi, Lelwala Tishni, Prasanka Kalana, Rathnayaka A S, Gamage Shanika, Agampodi Suneth
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Leishmaniasis is a notifiable disease in Sri Lanka since 2008. Previous studies show a gap in the notification of leishmaniasis. The purpose of the present study was to determine the Knowledge, attitudes and practice of medical officers regarding leishmaniasis.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Anuradhapura district which reported the highest case load of leishmaniasis. Medical officers from public and private health care institutes in the area filled a self-administered questionnaire in the presence of the investigators.
RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight (188) medical officers completed the questionnaire. Of them, 95.7% were aware of leishmaniasis as a parasitic infection and 84.7% correctly identified Leishmania donovani as the causative organism in Sri Lanka. From the respondents, 181 (96.8%) knew that the vector of leishmaniasis is sand fly. Cutaneous leishmaniasis was reported as the most prevalent form of leishmaniasis in the country by 176 (94.1%). Nearly half of the respondents (98, 54.1%) were aware of the fact that the Anuradhapura district has the highest disease burden. Many of them had the idea that leishmaniasis is an emerging disease (155, 84.3%,) and early diagnosis is important in controlling the disease (163, 89.1%). Although about three fourth (123, 73.7%,) of the participants mentioned that leishmaniasis should be notified at first clinical suspicion, only 74 (42.5%) were aware that it is a legal requirement. Some medical officers (39, 22%) believed that the current notification system in the country is not effective. Unavailability of notification forms (60, 36.8%) heavy workload (85, 50.3%) and inadequate supportive staff (55, 35.1%) were reported as barriers for timely notification. Even though 105 (58.0%) of medical officers had suspected leishmaniasis during the last 8 years period only 35 (19.4%) had notified.
CONCLUSIONS: Even though more than 90% of the participants had good theoretical knowledge about leishmaniasis; notification of leishmaniasis is considerably inadequate. This study emphasizes the need for greater efforts to improve the notification of leishmaniasis in Sri Lanka.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Anuradhapura district which reported the highest case load of leishmaniasis. Medical officers from public and private health care institutes in the area filled a self-administered questionnaire in the presence of the investigators.
RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight (188) medical officers completed the questionnaire. Of them, 95.7% were aware of leishmaniasis as a parasitic infection and 84.7% correctly identified Leishmania donovani as the causative organism in Sri Lanka. From the respondents, 181 (96.8%) knew that the vector of leishmaniasis is sand fly. Cutaneous leishmaniasis was reported as the most prevalent form of leishmaniasis in the country by 176 (94.1%). Nearly half of the respondents (98, 54.1%) were aware of the fact that the Anuradhapura district has the highest disease burden. Many of them had the idea that leishmaniasis is an emerging disease (155, 84.3%,) and early diagnosis is important in controlling the disease (163, 89.1%). Although about three fourth (123, 73.7%,) of the participants mentioned that leishmaniasis should be notified at first clinical suspicion, only 74 (42.5%) were aware that it is a legal requirement. Some medical officers (39, 22%) believed that the current notification system in the country is not effective. Unavailability of notification forms (60, 36.8%) heavy workload (85, 50.3%) and inadequate supportive staff (55, 35.1%) were reported as barriers for timely notification. Even though 105 (58.0%) of medical officers had suspected leishmaniasis during the last 8 years period only 35 (19.4%) had notified.
CONCLUSIONS: Even though more than 90% of the participants had good theoretical knowledge about leishmaniasis; notification of leishmaniasis is considerably inadequate. This study emphasizes the need for greater efforts to improve the notification of leishmaniasis in Sri Lanka.