A Comparative analysis of economic cost of podoconiosos and leprosy on affected households in Northwest region of Cameroon

Leprosy and podoconiosis (podo) are neglected tropical diseases that cause severe disfigurement and disability, and may lead to catastrophic health expenditure and hinder economic development of affected persons and households. This study compared economic costs of both diseases on affected households with unaffected neighboring households in the Northwest Region (N.W.R.) of Cameroon. A matched comparative cross-sectional design was used enrolling 170 households (43 podo case households, 41 podo control households, 43 leprosy case households, and 43 leprosy control households) from three health districts in the N.W.R. Direct treatment costs for podo averaged 142 United State dollar (USD), compared with zero for leprosy (P < 0.001). This was also reflected in the proportion of annual household income consumed (0.4 versus 0.0, respectively, P < 0.001). Both diseases caused considerable reductions in working days (leprosy 115 versus podo 135 days. P for comparison < 0.001). The average household income was considerably lower in podo-affected households than unaffected households (410 versus 913 USD, P = 0.01), whereas income of leprosy-affected households was comparable to unaffected households (329 versus 399 USD, P = 0.23). Both leprosy and podo cause financial burdens on affected households, but those on podo-affected families are much greater. These burdens occur through direct treatment costs and reduced ability to work. Improved access to public health interventions for podo including prevention, morbidity management and disability prevention are likely to result in economic returns to affected families. In Cameroon, one approach to this would be through subsidized health insurance for these economically vulnerable households

Programmatic factors associated with the limited impact of Community-Directed Treatment with Ivermectin to control Onchocerciasis in three drainage basins of South West Cameroon

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>The CDTI model is known to have enhanced community participation in planning and resource mobilization toward the control of onchocerciasis. These effects were expected to translate into better individual acceptance of the intervention and hence high Treatment Coverage, leading to a sustainable community-led strategy and reduction in the disease burden. A survey revealed that after 10–12 rounds of treatment, prevalence of onchocerciasis was still high in three drainage basins of South West Cameroon and transmission was going on.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We designed a three (3)-year retrospective (2012, 2013 and 2014), descriptive cross-sectional study to explore the roles of operational challenges in the failure of CDTI to control the disease as expected. We administered 83 semi-structured questionnaires and conducted 12 in-depth interviews with Chiefs of Bureau Health, Chiefs of Centers, CDDs and Community Heads. Descriptive statistics was used to explore indicators of performance which were supported with views from in-depth interviews.</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that community participation was weak; communities were not deciding time and mode of distributions. Only 6 (15.0%) of 40 Community Drug Distributors reported they were selected at general community meetings as required. The health service was not able to meet and discuss Community-Directed Treatment with Ivermectin activities with individual communities partly due to transportation challenges; this was mostly done through letters. Funding was reported to be inadequate and not timely. Funds were not available to conduct Community-Self Monitoring after the 2014 Mass Drug Administration. There was inadequate health staff at the frontline health facility levels, and some Chiefs of Center reported that Community-Directed Treatment with Ivermectin work was too much for them. The mean operational Community Drug Distributor-population ratio was 1 Community Drug Distributor per 317 populations (range: 194–464, expected is 1:250). Community Drug Distributor attrition rate was 14% (2012), 11% (2013) and 12% (2014) of total Community Drug Distributors trained in the region. Lack of incentive for Community Drug Distributor was primary reason for Community Drug Distributor attrition. Number of Community Drug Distributors trained together by health area ranged from 14 to 127 (mean ± SD = 51 ±32) with duration of training ranging from 4–7 hours (mean ± SD = 5.05 ± 1.09). The trainings were conducted at the health centers. Community Drug Distributors always conducted census during the past three distributions (Mean ± SD = 2.85 ± 0.58). Community-Self Monitoring was facing challenge. Several of the community heads, Chiefs of Bureau Health and Chiefs of Center agreed that Community-Self Monitoring was not being carried out effectively due to lack of incentives for monitors in the communities.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Inadequate human resource, funding issues and transportation challenges during distribution periods reduced the ability of the health service to thoroughly sensitize communities and supervise CDTI activities. This resulted in weak community understanding, acceptance and participation in the process. CDTI in our study area did not achieve sustainable community-led campaign and this may have led to the reduced impact on Onchocerciasis.</p></div

The experiences of 40 CDDs with CDTI process.

<p>The experiences of 40 CDDs with CDTI process.</p

Level of Community heads awareness of community roles in the CDTI process.

<p>Level of Community heads awareness of community roles in the CDTI process.</p

Mode of selection of CDDs in the study communities.

<p>Mode of selection of CDDs in the study communities.</p

Characteristics of CDD training for the past three distributions in our study area.

<p>Characteristics of CDD training for the past three distributions in our study area.</p

Frequency of supervision and review meeting carried out over the past three years.

<p>Frequency of supervision and review meeting carried out over the past three years.</p

The experiences of COCs with Ivermectin distribution over the past three years.

<p>The experiences of COCs with Ivermectin distribution over the past three years.</p

Mode of sensitization on Ivermectin distribution over the past three years in the health districts of the study sites.

<p>Mode of sensitization on Ivermectin distribution over the past three years in the health districts of the study sites.</p

CDDs’ experience with Ivermectin distribution over the past three years.

<p>CDDs’ experience with Ivermectin distribution over the past three years.</p