03034nas a2200325 4500000000100000008004100001260001300042653004000055653002000095653001100115653001000126653002300136653001200159653002900171653002400200653002300224653002100247100001000268700001700278700001100295700001300306700001600319245010800335856005100443300001100494490000700505050003200512520215000544022001402694 2002 d c2002 Jun10aDelivery of Health Care, Integrated10aHealth Planning10aHumans10aIndia10aInservice Training10aleprosy10aNational Health Programs10aPrimary Health Care10aProgram evaluation10aRural Population1 aRao P1 aBhuskade R A1 aRaju S1 aRao RP V1 aDesikan K V00aInitial experiences of implementation of functional integration (FI) in LEPRA India projects in Orissa. uhttps://leprosyreview.org/article/73/2/16-7176 a167-760 v73 aInfolep Library - available3 a

In 2000, the Government of the State of Orissa (population 37 million) in India decided to introduce functional integration for the control of leprosy, in place of the long-established vertical programme, using the general health services and the primary health care system. This paper describes the initial (9 months) experience of implementing this strategy in two projects run by LEPRA India. One of these, in the district of Koraput, was established in 1991 and covers a population of 1.5 million people. The other, in Kalahandi district, started in 1997 and covers a population of 600,000. Both projects operate under difficult conditions with regard to terrain, the use of numerous tribal languages, illiteracy, water shortage, poor roads and communications. The preparatory phase included intensive health education of the public on leprosy, using a wide range of educational media and techniques. At the same time, LEPRA India supported the Government in the training and orientation of trainers, medical officers, primary health care staff and female health workers at village level. In all, over 2000 were trained. This paper describes all aspects of the implementation of functional integration in these two areas. In the 9-month period, 4207 suspect cases were referred to medical officers by health workers, but only 256 (6%) were confirmed as having leprosy. There were 169 confirmed self-reporting cases. Despite the clearly understood intention to involve primary health staff in case detection, 67% of all cases were in fact detected by LEPRA India, possibly due to overlapping attendance at clinics by vertical and general staff. There is obviously a need for further training of the general staff since only 6% of cases referred by them were confirmed as having leprosy. Steps must also be taken to ensure that the emphasis on case detection, confirmation and treatment shifts from the vertical to the general health staff. The supply of anti-leprosy drugs and steroids to primary health centers needs improvement. Appropriate teaching and learning material is urgently needed for both field staff and medical officers.

 a0305-7518