Leprosy mailing list – August 8th, 2005

Ccn:     all.

Ref.:     ILEP Technical Commission discussion documents.

From:   S Noto, Genoa, Italy.

---

 

 

 

Dear Ms Lord,

 

Thank you very much for your message and for the important enclosed documents prepared by Dr P Krishnamurthy (LML Aug 7^th, 2005 - ILEP Technical Commission discussion documents). I find them very interesting. I would like to make a few comments on the “discussion document on monitoring of epidemiological trends of leprosy and validation of data”.

 

1.

“Essential indicator (new case detection – number/rate per 100 000 population)”.

Wouldn’t the number/rate per 10 000 population be better? The use of the rate per 10 000, like for the registered prevalence would make easier, for example, the calculation of the ratio registered prevalence/detection.

 

2.

“Additional indicators (Proportion of MB among new cases detected)”

It might be better to specify the importance of the slit-skin smear examination for a correct classification of the patient).

 

3.

“Additional indicators (proportion of patients with disability grade 2 among new cases detected)”.

Here my concern is about the use of the classification of disabilities in the grades 0-1-2. This system is too simple and not very helpful.

 

Best regards,

 

S. Noto