This case-control study was nested within a clinical trial of two alternative surgical treatments for trichiasis. From the 1000 trichiasis cases recruited into the trial, every fifth consecutive case was also enrolled into this economic poverty study and matched to a non-trichiasis control. This approach was chosen for logistical and methodological reasons, in order to identify and collect data from controls within the shortest possible time period following case recruitment. Cases were defined as individuals with one or more eyelashes touching the eyeball or with evidence of epilation in either or both eyes in association with tarsal conjunctival scarring. People with trichiasis of other causes, recurrent trichiasis and those under 18 years were excluded. Trichiasis cases were identified mainly through community-based screening. Trichiasis screeners and counsellors (Eye Ambassadors) visited every household in their target village, identified and referred trichiasis cases to health facilities where surgical services were provided. Some individuals self-presented or were referred by local health workers. Recruitment was mainly from three districts of West Gojam Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia between February and May 2014. This area has one of the highest burdens of trachoma worldwide [21 (link)].
Controls were individuals without clinical evidence or a history of trichiasis (including surgery and epilation), and who came from households without a family member with trichiasis or a history of trichiasis, as we wanted to measure household level relative poverty, which requires comparison of trichiasis case households with households without trichiasis cases. One control was individually matched to each trichiasis case by location, sex and age (+/- two years). The research team visited the sub-village (30–50 households) of the trichiasis case requiring a matched control. A list of all potentially eligible people living in the sub-village of was compiled with the help of the sub-village administrator. One person was randomly selected from this list using a lottery method, given details of the study and invited to participate if eligible. If a selected individual refused or was ineligible, another was randomly selected from the list. When eligible controls were not identified within the sub-village of the case, recruitment was done in the nearest neighbouring sub-village, using the same procedures.
Free full text: Click here