Can people affected by leprosy at risk of developing plantar ulcers be identified? A field study from central...

In the ALERT leprosy control programme, 75 people affected by leprosy, in three different geographical areas, were investigated. Each person was documented as having anaesthesia to the 10 g monofilament. The study sought to determine why some people developed ulcers whilst others did not. According to the records, 43 had an ulcer during the last 5 years but 32 had never had an ulcer. In order to examine protective sensation on the sole of the foot, various sensory modalities were tested and the functional anatomy of the foot was examined. The results showed, as may be expected, that it is not possible to define a specific threshold for protective sensation that could be applied to all cases. Some people with only slightly diminished sensation developed ulcers, while many others with almost complete anaesthesia remained ulcer-free. In these rural communities, being a farmer reduced the risk of developing an ulcer, but no other demographic features were significant. Graded monofilaments were found to be the most appropriate test, with loss of sensation at any of five points tested being a 'positive' result. The 10 g filament was the most sensitive, but only 43% of feet identified by this test actually developed an ulcer. As people with partial loss of sensation were excluded from this study, this figure may be lower under programme conditions. The 50 g and 100 g filaments decrease the number of feet identified as at risk, but increase the percentage which actually develop an ulcer, to 46% and 49%, respectively. An appropriate test for selecting those for special programmes which may have a limited capacity, for example the provision of subsidized footwear or involvement in self-care groups, would be a 100 g filament, which would detect 86% of those feet likely to develop an ulcer, while reducing the number of those selected who are not at great risk. Vibrometry was found to be no better than graded filaments and an examination of functional anatomy did not help in identifying those at risk.