02559nas a2200445 4500000000100000008004100001260001300042653003100055653001000086653000900096653002200105653001100127653002600138653001100164653001100175653001900186653001200205653000900217653001600226653001800242653002000260653003000280653002800310653002100338653003100359653001600390100001600406700001700422700001500439700001600454700001700470700001600487245011300503856005100616300001000667490000700677050003200684520138300716022001402099 2010 d c2010 Mar10aActivities of Daily Living10aAdult10aAged10aAged, 80 and over10aBrazil10aDisability Evaluation10aFemale10aHumans10aLeper Colonies10aleprosy10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aPsychometrics10aQuality of Life10aSeverity of Illness Index10aSickness Impact Profile10aSocial Isolation10aSurveys and Questionnaires10aYoung Adult1 aLesshafft H1 aHeukelbach J1 aBarbosa JC1 aRieckmann N1 aLiesenfeld O1 aFeldmeier H00aPerceived social restriction in leprosy-affected inhabitants of a former leprosy colony in northeast Brazil. uhttps://leprosyreview.org/article/81/1/06-9078 a69-780 v81 aInfolep Library - available3 a

INTRODUCTION: In Brazil, isolation of individuals affected with leprosy was compulsory by law from 1920 to 1962, but in reality, confinement of patients to leprosaria continued until the 1980s. The social participation restriction of people still living in these institutions has never been investigated systematically.

STUDY AIM: To examine the extent and type of participation restriction perceived by former leprosy patients living in the Centro de Convivência Antônio Diogo (CCAD), a previous leprosy colony in rural Northeast Brazil, by using the Participation Scale.

RESULTS: Forty (51-9%) out of 77 individuals reported significant participation restrictions, mainly related to work and mobility. Perceived participation restriction was significantly higher in people living in nursing units of the CCAD (P = 0-001), if diagnosis of leprosy was made before 1982 (P = 0.002), in the presence of walking limitation (P < 0.001) and visible physical alterations (P = 0-002), such as foot deformities (P = 0.002), saddle nose (P = 0.03) and blindness (P = 0.04), and in those individuals who did not receive visitors (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION: Social rehabilitation, especially in the areas of work and mobility, is strongly needed together with prevention of debilitating physical sequelae and reduction of stigmatisation.

 a0305-7518