IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0006622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Socioeconomic risk markers of leprosy in high-burden countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Julia Moreira Pescarini
  • Agostino Strina
  • Joilda Silva Nery
  • Lacita Menezes Skalinski
  • Kaio Vinicius Freitas de Andrade
  • Maria Lucia F Penna
  • Elizabeth B Brickley
  • Laura C Rodrigues
  • Mauricio Lima Barreto
  • Gerson Oliveira Penna

Abstract

Over 200,000 new cases of leprosy are detected each year, of which approximately 7% are associated with grade-2 disabilities (G2Ds). For achieving leprosy elimination, one of the main challenges will be targeting higher risk groups within endemic communities. Nevertheless, the socioeconomic risk markers of leprosy remain poorly understood. To address this gap we systematically reviewed MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, LILACS and Web of Science for original articles investigating the social determinants of leprosy in countries with > 1000 cases/year in at least five years between 2006 and 2016. Cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, and ecological studies were eligible for inclusion; qualitative studies, case reports, and reviews were excluded. Out of 1,534 non-duplicate records, 96 full-text articles were reviewed, and 39 met inclusion criteria. 17 were included in random-effects meta-analyses for sex, occupation, food shortage, household contact, crowding, and lack of clean (i.e., treated) water. The majority of studies were conducted in Brazil, India, or Bangladesh while none were undertaken in low-income countries. Descriptive synthesis indicated that increased age, poor sanitary and socioeconomic conditions, lower level of education, and food-insecurity are risk markers for leprosy. Additionally, in pooled estimates, leprosy was associated with being male (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.06–1.67), performing manual labor (RR = 2.15, 95% CI = 0.97–4.74), suffering from food shortage in the past (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.05–1.85), being a household contact of a leprosy patient (RR = 3.40, 95% CI = 2.24–5.18), and living in a crowded household (≥5 per household) (RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.14–1.67). Lack of clean water did not appear to be a risk marker of leprosy (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.65–1.35). Additionally, ecological studies provided evidence that lower inequality, better human development, increased healthcare coverage, and cash transfer programs are linked with lower leprosy risks. These findings point to a consistent relationship between leprosy and unfavorable economic circumstances and, thereby, underscore the pressing need of leprosy control policies to target socially vulnerable groups in high-burden countries.Author summary: Many cases of leprosy still occur in low and middle-income countries, with a considerable proportion of them leading to permanent nerve damage and visible physical deformities. Disease elimination can be achieved with a better understanding of the sociodemographic characteristics of those most affected by the disease and by targeting those with greater risk within endemic countries. To address this question, we reviewed all published studies evaluating the social determinants of leprosy in countries endemic for leprosy. We found 39 studies, most of them conducted in Brazil (i.e., an upper-middle-income country), India or Bangladesh (i.e., lower-middle income countries), and none in low-income countries. Our review found strong evidence that males, household contacts of leprosy patients, individuals living in crowded households, and individuals who suffered food shortage in the past are more affected by leprosy. Evidence also exists that increasing age, poor sanitary and socioeconomic conditions, lower levels of education, and food insecurity are associated with a greater risk of leprosy. Our review underscores the importance of improving living conditions and decreasing inequality in low and middle-income countries to achieve leprosy elimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Julia Moreira Pescarini & Agostino Strina & Joilda Silva Nery & Lacita Menezes Skalinski & Kaio Vinicius Freitas de Andrade & Maria Lucia F Penna & Elizabeth B Brickley & Laura C Rodrigues & Mauricio , 2018. "Socioeconomic risk markers of leprosy in high-burden countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0006622
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0006622
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0006622&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0006622?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Trang VoPham & Matthew D. Weaver & Gary Adamkiewicz & Jaime E. Hart, 2021. "Social Distancing Associations with COVID-19 Infection and Mortality Are Modified by Crowding and Socioeconomic Status," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-8, April.
    2. Guilherme L de Oliveira & Juliane F Oliveira & Júlia M Pescarini & Roberto F S Andrade & Joilda S Nery & Maria Y Ichihara & Liam Smeeth & Elizabeth B Brickley & Maurício L Barreto & Gerson O Penna & M, 2021. "Estimating underreporting of leprosy in Brazil using a Bayesian approach," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Xiang Li & Jing Yang & Lianhua Zhang & Guangjie Jin & Li Xu & Fujin Fang & Yunhui Li & Pingmin Wei, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Leprosy during 2000–2021 from Web of Science Database," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-14, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0006622. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.