RESUMEN
Understanding local perceptions of disease causation could help public health officials improve strategies to prevent bloody diarrhoea. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Dhaka, Bangladesh to elicit community beliefs about the causes of and prevention strategies for bloody diarrhoea. Between March and June 2003, we interviewed 541 randomly selected respondents. Overall, 507 (93%) respondents perceived that a vaccine could prevent bloody diarrhoea. If a vaccine provided lifetime protection, 445 (83%) respondents stated that they would opt to get the vaccine and would pay a median of $0·05 (range U.S.$0·01-0·15) for it, equivalent to <1% of their median weekly income. There was almost universal perception that an effective vaccine to prevent bloody diarrhoea was highly beneficial and acceptable. While respondents valued a vaccine for prevention of bloody diarrhoea, they were only willing to pay minimally for it. Therefore, achieving a high rate of Shigella vaccine coverage may require subsidy of vaccine purchase.
Asunto(s)
Disentería Bacilar/epidemiología , Disentería Bacilar/prevención & control , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunas contra la Shigella/inmunología , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bangladesh/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Áreas de Pobreza , Vacunas contra la Shigella/economía , Vacunación/economía , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Injuries are an increasing child health concern and have become a leading cause of child mortality in the 1-4 years age group in many developing countries, including Bangladesh. METHODS: Household observations during 9 months of a community-based pilot of two supervision tools-a door barrier and a playpen-designed to assess their community acceptability in rural Bangladesh are reported in this article. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of 2694 observations revealed that children were directly supervised or protected by a preventive tool in 96% of visits. Households with a supervision tool had a significantly lower proportion of observations with the child unsupervised and unprotected than households without a tool. Families that received a playpen had 6.89 times the odds of using it at the time of the visit than families that received a door barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions such as the playpen, when introduced to households through community-based programs, are accepted by parents. Field trials are urgently needed to establish the effectiveness of barrier-based interventions at reducing under-five drowning mortality rates in low-income countries like Bangladesh.