Deb K. Pal
Comparison of key informant and survey methods for ascertainment of childhood epilepsy in West Bengal, India
Child In Need Institute|University College London
study aimed compare efficacy cost key informants survey ascertainment childhood epilepsy within treatment context rural indiathe study set nongovernmental community programme functional socioeconomic rehabilitation children disabilities rural west bengal india ascertainment two methods housetohouse survey 15000 households also 430 key informants including village leaders health workers 670 schoolchildren methods compared positive predictive value sensitivity capturerecapture technique ninety four children enrolled treatment predictors treatment success determined multiple logistic regression analysis giving adjusted odds ratios remission costs identifying one case one treatment success measured costing personnel materials overheadsthe survey four times sensitive key informants although positive predictive values similar 36 40 survey absolute sensitivity 59 identification key informants strongly predicted successful treatment outcome odds ratio 474 95 confidence interval ci 1191885 cost finding one case us11 us14 finding one successful treatment outcome us35 us67 informants survey respectively key informants essential attaining longer term programme objectivesin context treatment programme key informants costeffective method community involvement traded low sensitivity short term overall ascertainment costs significant context primary health care indiaepilepsy important neurological problem developing countries total 50 million people worldwide condition 33 million cases children developing countries 90 untreated determine number children active epilepsy given developing country community previous studies either ascertained information directly key informants community broadbased twostage surveys findings reported study conducted 46 villages district 24 parganas south rural district south calcutta comparing two approaches sensitivity efficacy costs village leaders health workers students interviewed key informants housetohouse surveys conducted 15000 households survey 4 times sensitive key informant approach although approaches similar positive predictive values survey absolute sensitivity 59 case identification key informants strongly predicted successful treatment outcomes cost finding 1 case us11 us14 finding one successful treatment outcome us35 us67 informants survey respectively use key informants essential attaining longerterm program objectives