Visão dos portadores de Hanseníase sobre a doença e o preconceito.

Abstract

Leprosy is a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae, manifesting itself through skin lesions, loss of sensation and affection of peripheral nerves. It constitutes a serious public health problem, given its prevalence and high power disabling. Currently its cure is possible, but the lack of information, stigma and prejudice are strongly present in society, despite significant advances with regard to its diagnosis, control and treatment, persisting history and past culture of contagious and incurable . This study aimed to describe the vision of leprosy patients on the disease and prejudice, after confirmation of the diagnosis, identify biased attitudes in family and social relations against leprosy patients and check the signs of self prejudice experienced by patients from diagnosis. This is an exploratorydescriptive, qualitative, through semi-structured and written to the home of each participant and analyzed using thematic analysis of the Collective Subject Discourse. Fiften uprozy patients from three family health units in the of Cajazeiras Collection were interviewed. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the State University of Paraiba, in the opinion paragraph 0163.0.133.000-11. The data show that most participants were men, were aged above 58 years, had little or no schooling, family income was up a monthly minimum wage, occupations may be a consequence of education. Most were married, Catholic and had a borderline clinical form. As for the narratives of the employees, it was found that the majority was disgusted and distressed to learn of the diagnosis of leprosy, noting that they only knew the popular sense or no information about the disease. As to self bias, most employees feel it showed, also through the perceived attitudes during the interview. On the view of the disease after confirmation of diagnosis, we found that they didn't know her before and after patients exceeded the targeted sadness continuing the treatment. Regarding family bias, the study showed that most of the families involved have the necessary support to enable the holder to continue treatment. The same happened in relation to coworkers, where the majority of participants didn't suffer prejudice, but those who suffered in the minority, we can associate with the clinical form most stigmatizing. Most participants chose not to tell the company that had the infection because they were afraid to suffer social exclusion. It is observed that lack of knowledge about the disease among patients, families and society reflected in suffering, stigma and prejudice of itself or by social relations. Thus, it points to the need to clarify, more clearly, the carriers of the disease, their relatives and the community than is actually the disease.