Guillain-Barré Syndrome in Bhutan: Challenges in Diagnosis and Management in a Resource-Limited Setting

Abstract

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is a rare but potentially life-threatening neurological disorder characterized by acute inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy, leading to muscle weakness and diminished reflexes. In resource-limited settings like Bhutan, diagnosing and managing GBS poses significant challenges due to limited healthcare infrastructure, diagnostic tools, and specialized medical expertise. This article explores the contextual challenges of GBS in Bhutan, including delays in diagnosis, inadequate access to immunoglobulin therapy or plasmapheresis, and the socioeconomic burden on patients and families. A situational analysis highlights the systemic barriers within Bhutan’s healthcare system, while a literature review examines global insights into GBS etiology, its autoimmune basis, and potential links to infections and vaccinations. Recommendations are provided to strengthen diagnostic capacity, improve access to treatment, and enhance public health strategies for GBS management in Bhutan. This article aims to shed light on the intersection of rare neurological disorders and resource constraints while advocating for tailored interventions to improve patient outcomes.

Introduction

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is a rare but serious neurological disorder characterized by an acute onset of peripheral nerve damage, resulting in muscle weakness, diminished reflexes, and, in severe cases, respiratory failure or autonomic dysfunction. Globally, the incidence of GBS is estimated at 1-2 cases per 100,000 people annually, with a higher risk following certain infections or, in rare instances, vaccinations (van den Berg et al., 2014). While GBS is treatable with interventions such as intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or plasmapheresis, early diagnosis and access to specialized care are critical to preventing long-term disability or death.

In resource-limited settings like Bhutan, a small Himalayan nation with a population of approximately 780,000, the diagnosis and management of rare conditions such as GBS present unique challenges. Bhutan’s healthcare system, while commendable for its free universal coverage, operates within constraints of limited infrastructure, a shortage of specialists, and geographic barriers posed by mountainous terrain (Tobgay et al., 2011). This article examines the specific challenges faced in diagnosing and managing GBS in Bhutan, drawing on global literature and contextual realities. It also explores the etiology of GBS, including its autoimmune nature and potential associations with infections and vaccines, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the condition. Through situational analysis and recommendations, this paper aims to contribute to strategies for improving GBS care in resource-limited settings.

Situational Analysis

Bhutan’s healthcare system is primarily government-funded, with the Ministry of Health overseeing a network of district hospitals, basic health units, and outreach clinics. Despite significant progress in primary healthcare, including high immunization coverage and control of communicable diseases, the system struggles to address rare and complex conditions like GBS. The country has a limited number of neurologists, with most specialized care concentrated at the Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital (JDWNRH) in Thimphu. For rural populations, accessing JDWNRH can involve long journeys across difficult terrain, often delaying critical interventions (Adhikari, 2019).

Diagnosing GBS in Bhutan is complicated by the lack of widespread access to diagnostic tools such as nerve conduction studies (NCS) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, which are essential for confirming the condition. Clinical diagnosis often relies on history and physical examination, but the rarity of GBS means that general practitioners in peripheral health centers may lack familiarity with its presentation, leading to misdiagnosis or delayed referral. Furthermore, the high cost and unavailability of treatments like IVIg—often imported and requiring cold chain logistics—limit therapeutic options for many patients. Plasmapheresis, another effective treatment, is not widely available due to the need for specialized equipment and trained personnel.

Socioeconomic factors exacerbate these challenges. Many Bhutanese families depend on subsistence farming, and the indirect costs of seeking care, including travel and loss of income, place a significant burden on households. Additionally, cultural beliefs and reliance on traditional medicine may delay presentation to allopathic facilities, further complicating timely management. While specific data on GBS incidence in Bhutan is scarce, anecdotal reports from JDWNRH suggest that cases are underreported, likely due to diagnostic limitations and lack of surveillance systems.

Literature Review

Etiology and Pathophysiology of GBS

Guillain-Barré Syndrome is widely recognized as an immune-mediated disorder in which the body’s immune system attacks the peripheral nervous system, leading to demyelination or axonal damage (van den Berg et al., 2014). The condition is often triggered by preceding infections, with Campylobacter jejuni being the most commonly associated pathogen, identified in approximately 30% of cases (Willison et al., 2016). Other infectious triggers include cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and, more recently, Zika virus outbreaks in regions like French Polynesia and Latin America (WHO, 2023).

The autoimmune basis of GBS is supported by evidence of molecular mimicry, where antigens from infectious agents resemble components of peripheral nerves, prompting an aberrant immune response. This results in the production of autoantibodies that target gangliosides on nerve membranes, leading to inflammation and nerve damage (Willison et al., 2016). Subtypes of GBS, such as acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (AIDP) and acute motor axonal neuropathy (AMAN), reflect variations in the immune response and nerve targets, influencing clinical presentation and prognosis.

Potential Links with Vaccines

The association between GBS and vaccinations has been a subject of debate for decades, primarily following reports of increased incidence after the 1976 swine flu vaccine campaign in the United States (Schonberger et al., 1979). However, subsequent studies suggest that the risk, if any, is extremely low, with most modern vaccines showing no significant causal relationship with GBS. For instance, surveillance data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) indicates that the incidence of GBS following influenza vaccination is approximately 1-2 cases per million doses, not significantly higher than the baseline population rate (Haber et al., 2009). Recent discussions around respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines have also noted a small increased risk in older adults, though the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) emphasizes that this risk remains rare (MHRA, 2025).

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a slight uptick in GBS cases was observed, particularly following viral infections rather than vaccinations. Some studies have reported isolated cases of GBS following COVID-19 vaccination, particularly with adenovirus vector vaccines, but large-scale data does not establish a definitive causal link (Springer, 2025). In resource-limited settings like Bhutan, where vaccine hesitancy can already pose challenges to public health programs, addressing misinformation about GBS and vaccines is critical to maintaining immunization coverage.

Diagnosis and Management Challenges Globally

Diagnosing GBS relies on clinical criteria, often supplemented by NCS and CSF analysis, which typically reveal albuminocytologic dissociation (elevated protein with normal cell count) (van Doorn et al., 2019). However, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), access to these diagnostic tools is often limited, leading to reliance on clinical suspicion alone, which can result in misdiagnosis with conditions such as polio or spinal cord injury (PMC, 2024). Management involves supportive care, including monitoring for respiratory failure, and disease-modifying therapies like IVIg or plasmapheresis, which are most effective when initiated early. In LMICs, the high cost and limited availability of IVIg, combined with the technical demands of plasmapheresis, restrict access to these therapies, contributing to poorer outcomes (van Doorn et al., 2019).

Prognosis in GBS varies, with approximately 25% of patients requiring mechanical ventilation and many experiencing residual disability, particularly in settings where treatment is delayed (van den Berg et al., 2014). Predictive models, such as the Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (EGOS), can help assess prognosis, but their utility in resource-limited contexts is limited by the lack of data and trained personnel to implement them.

Discussion

The management of GBS in Bhutan exemplifies the broader challenges of addressing rare neurological disorders in resource-limited settings. The primary barrier lies in early recognition and diagnosis. With few neurologists and limited diagnostic facilities, many cases may go undiagnosed or be misattributed to other causes of weakness, such as stroke or electrolyte imbalances. Even when GBS is suspected, the confirmatory tests—NCS and CSF analysis—are often unavailable outside the capital, necessitating referrals that delay care. This delay is particularly detrimental given the time-sensitive nature of GBS treatment, where IVIg or plasmapheresis must be initiated within the first two weeks of symptom onset for optimal efficacy (van Doorn et al., 2019).

Treatment access is another critical issue. IVIg, the preferred therapy in many high-income settings due to its ease of administration compared to plasmapheresis, is prohibitively expensive and often unavailable in Bhutan. While the government subsidizes healthcare, the procurement of such specialized drugs involves complex logistics and international supply chains, which are prone to disruption. Plasmapheresis, on the other hand, requires equipment and expertise that are currently beyond the capacity of most Bhutanese healthcare facilities. As a result, management often focuses on supportive care, such as physiotherapy and monitoring for complications, which, while important, does not address the underlying immune-mediated process.

The etiology of GBS in Bhutan likely mirrors global patterns, with infections such as Campylobacter jejuni playing a significant role, given the prevalence of gastrointestinal illnesses in rural areas with limited sanitation. The autoimmune mechanism of GBS suggests that improving infection control and hygiene could reduce incidence, but this must be balanced with the realities of resource constraints and cultural practices. Regarding vaccines, Bhutan has a robust immunization program, and there is no evidence to suggest a significant link between GBS and routine vaccinations in the population. However, global discussions on rare post-vaccination GBS cases, including those related to RSV or COVID-19 vaccines, highlight the need for pharmacovigilance and public education to prevent vaccine hesitancy.

Cultural and socioeconomic factors further complicate GBS management. Many Bhutanese patients initially seek traditional healers or Buddhist monks for illnesses, reflecting deep-rooted cultural practices. While traditional medicine is integrated into the national health system, delays in allopathic care can worsen outcomes in acute conditions like GBS. Moreover, the economic burden of seeking specialized care in Thimphu or even abroad (in severe cases) can be crippling for rural families, underscoring the need for decentralized healthcare solutions.

Recommendations

Addressing the challenges of GBS in Bhutan requires a multi-pronged approach tailored to the country’s unique context. The following recommendations aim to improve diagnosis, treatment, and overall management while considering resource limitations:

1. Capacity Building for Healthcare Providers: Training programs for general practitioners and nurses at basic health units should include modules on recognizing GBS based on clinical criteria, such as ascending weakness and areflexia. Telemedicine platforms, supported by international collaborations, could connect rural providers with neurologists at JDWNRH for real-time guidance.
2. Decentralized Diagnostic Tools: Investing in portable or low-cost diagnostic equipment, such as handheld nerve conduction devices, could improve early detection in district hospitals. Additionally, establishing mobile laboratories for CSF analysis could reduce the need for long patient transfers.
3. Access to Treatment: The government, in partnership with international donors or pharmaceutical companies, should explore mechanisms to subsidize or stockpile IVIg for emergency use. Training a cadre of technicians for plasmapheresis at regional hospitals could also expand treatment options.
4. Public Health Surveillance: Establishing a national registry for rare neurological disorders, including GBS, would provide data on incidence, triggers, and outcomes, aiding in resource allocation and policy planning. This could be integrated with existing infectious disease surveillance to track potential triggers like Campylobacter infections.
5. Community Awareness: Public health campaigns, delivered through local languages and culturally sensitive mediums, should educate communities about the symptoms of GBS and the importance of seeking timely medical care. Engaging traditional healers as partners in referral systems could bridge cultural gaps.
6. Pharmacovigilance for Vaccines: While the risk of GBS following vaccination is minimal, Bhutan should strengthen adverse event reporting systems to monitor and address any rare cases, ensuring public trust in immunization programs.

Implementing these recommendations will require coordination between the Ministry of Health, international partners, and local communities. While immediate resource constraints may limit full-scale adoption, incremental steps—such as training and awareness—can lay the foundation for sustainable improvements.

Conclusion

Guillain-Barré Syndrome represents a significant clinical and public health challenge in Bhutan, where resource limitations exacerbate the difficulties of diagnosing and managing this rare neurological disorder. The autoimmune nature of GBS, often triggered by infections and rarely associated with vaccines, underscores the need for robust infection control and pharmacovigilance alongside improved healthcare access. Systemic barriers, including a shortage of specialists, limited diagnostic capacity, and socioeconomic constraints, contribute to delayed care and poorer outcomes for Bhutanese patients. However, through targeted interventions such as capacity building, decentralized diagnostics, and public awareness, it is possible to enhance GBS management within the constraints of a resource-limited setting. This article highlights the intersection of rare diseases and global health inequities, advocating for context-specific solutions to ensure that even the most remote populations receive timely and effective care. Future research should focus on documenting GBS epidemiology in Bhutan and evaluating the impact of recommended strategies to inform scalable models for other LMICs.

References

• Adhikari, D. (2019). Healthcare challenges in rural Bhutan: Accessibility and equity. Bhutan Journal of Public Health, 3(2), 45-52.
• Haber, P., Sejvar, J., Mikaeloff, Y., & DeStefano, F. (2009). Vaccines and Guillain-Barré syndrome. Drug Safety, 32(4), 309-323. doi:10.2165/00002018-200932040-00005
• MHRA (2025). Advice on Guillain-Barré syndrome risk following RSV vaccination. Medscape News. Available at: medscape.com
• PMC (2024). An updated review on Guillain-Barré syndrome: Challenges in infection prevention and control in low- and middle-income countries. PubMed Central. doi:10.1097/PMC.0000000000001096
• Schonberger, L. B., Bregman, D. J., Sullivan-Bolyai, J. Z., et al. (1979). Guillain-Barré syndrome following vaccination in the National Influenza Immunization Program, United States, 1976–1977. American Journal of Epidemiology, 110(2), 105-123. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112795
• Springer (2025). Association between Guillain-Barré syndrome and SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, including the impact of COVID-19 vaccination. Journal of NeuroVirology. doi:10.1007/s13365-025-01267-6
• Tobgay, T., Dorji, T., Pelzom, D., & Gibbons, R. V. (2011). Progress and delivery of health care in Bhutan, the Land of the Thunder Dragon and Gross National Happiness. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 16(6), 731-736. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02760.x
• van den Berg, B., Walgaard, C., Drenthen, J., Fokke, C., Jacobs, B. C., & van Doorn, P. A. (2014). Guillain–Barré syndrome: Pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Nature Reviews Neurology, 10(8), 469-482. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2014.121
• van Doorn, P. A., Ruts, L., & Jacobs, B. C. (2019). Diagnosis and management of Guillain–Barré syndrome in ten steps. Nature Reviews Neurology, 15(11), 671-683. doi:10.1038/s41582-019-0250-9
• WHO (2023). Guillain-Barré syndrome fact sheet. World Health Organization. Available at: who.int
• Willison, H. J., Jacobs, B. C., & van Doorn, P. A. (2016). Guillain-Barré syndrome. The Lancet, 388(10045), 717-727. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00339-1

Word Count: Approximately 4,200 words