Factors affecting treatment adherence among leprosy patients: Perceptions of healthcare providers

Background

Treatment adherence is a vital aspect in the management of chronic diseases like leprosy; however, most studies on treatment adherence focus on patients. This study aims to examine the perceptions of healthcare providers on factors that can promote or prevent patients from adhering to treatment.

Methods

We conducted three focus group discussions (FGDs) with healthcare providers who have at least one year experience in managing leprosy in three large leprosy case-holding hospitals in Metro Manila, Philippines. We audio-recorded, transcribed, translated the FGD proceedings, and analyzed the transcripts thematically to identify patient-intrinsic and patient-extrinsic enablers and barriers to treatment adherence of leprosy patients.

Results

Patient-intrinsic motivators to complete treatment include innate desire to be cured, fear of infecting family and friends, fear of disability, good knowledge about the disease, need for medical clearance to be considered fit to work, and experiencing leprosy reactions. Patient-extrinsic motivators to complete treatment include free treatment, immediate and sufficient counselling, flexibility in treatment, follow-up and motivation of healthcare workers, and presence of Hansen's Club and support groups. Patient-intrinsic barriers to good treatment adherence include distance between residence and hospital, financial and opportunity costs, adverse drug reactions, misconceptions about being cured, disabilities and presence of leprosy reactions, stubbornness and/or laziness, and undergoing clinical depression. Patient-extrinsic barriers to good treatment adherence include poor availability of MDT, transfer to other leprosy treatment facilities without informing current facility, and stigma.

Conclusion

Healthcare providers perceive that patient-intrinsic and patient-extrinsic factors influence the treatment adherence of leprosy patients through different mechanisms. We highlight the role of healthcare provider attitudes, stigma, and support groups in promoting treatment adherence.

Patterns and determinants of treatment completion and default among newly diagnosed multibacillary leprosy patients: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Poor treatment adherence among leprosy patients contribute to relapse, development of antimicrobial resistance, and the eventual plateauing of the prevalence and incidence of leprosy not just in the Philippines, but also worldwide. For this reason, we aimed to identify the patterns and determinants affecting treatment completion and default among multibacillary leprosy patients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving three large hospitals in Metro Manila, Philippines. Patients who started the World Health Organization - Multiple Drug Therapy for multibacillary leprosy between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2013 were included in the study. Selected socio-demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the patient treatment records. Survival analysis and proportional hazards regression were used to analyze the data.

Results

Records of 1,034 patients with a total follow-up time of 12,287 person-months were included in the analysis. Most patients were male, younger than 45 years old, had an initial bacterial index between 1 and 4, and were residents of Metro Manila. Less than 20% had their treatment duration extended to more than 12 months. Treatment adherence of the patients was poor with less than 60% completing treatment. Most patients complete their treatment within 12 months, but treatment duration may be extended for up to three years. Patients who default from treatment usually do so a few months after initiating it. After adjusting for other variables, hospital, initial bacterial index, and non-extended treatment duration were associated with treatment completion. These factors, in addition to age, were also found to be associated with treatment default.

Conclusion

This study provides quantitative evidence that there might be marked variations in how doctors in particular hospitals manage their patients, and these findings underscore the need to revisit and re-evaluate clinical practice guidelines to improve treatment outcomes and adherence.