Cargando…

Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes

Background: Community-based active case finding (ACF) for tuberculosis (TB) implemented among marginalised and vulnerable populations in 285 districts of India resulted in reduction of diagnosis delay and prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis. We were interested to know whether this t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shewade, Hemant Deepak, Gupta, Vivek, Satyanarayana, Srinath, Kumar, Sunil, Pandey, Prabhat, Bajpai, U. N., Tripathy, Jaya Prasad, Kathirvel, Soundappan, Pandurangan, Sripriya, Mohanty, Subrat, Ghule, Vaibhav Haribhau, Sagili, Karuna D., Prasad, Banuru Muralidhara, Singh, Priyanka, Singh, Kamlesh, Jayaraman, Gurukartick, Rajeswaran, P., Biswas, Moumita, Mallick, Gayadhar, Naqvi, Ali Jafar, Bharadwaj, Ashwin Kumar, Sathiyanarayanan, K., Pathak, Aniruddha, Mohan, Nisha, Rao, Raghuram, Kumar, Ajay M. V., Chadha, Sarabjit Singh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6735288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31475635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2019.1656451
_version_ 1783450327244079104
author Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Gupta, Vivek
Satyanarayana, Srinath
Kumar, Sunil
Pandey, Prabhat
Bajpai, U. N.
Tripathy, Jaya Prasad
Kathirvel, Soundappan
Pandurangan, Sripriya
Mohanty, Subrat
Ghule, Vaibhav Haribhau
Sagili, Karuna D.
Prasad, Banuru Muralidhara
Singh, Priyanka
Singh, Kamlesh
Jayaraman, Gurukartick
Rajeswaran, P.
Biswas, Moumita
Mallick, Gayadhar
Naqvi, Ali Jafar
Bharadwaj, Ashwin Kumar
Sathiyanarayanan, K.
Pathak, Aniruddha
Mohan, Nisha
Rao, Raghuram
Kumar, Ajay M. V.
Chadha, Sarabjit Singh
author_facet Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Gupta, Vivek
Satyanarayana, Srinath
Kumar, Sunil
Pandey, Prabhat
Bajpai, U. N.
Tripathy, Jaya Prasad
Kathirvel, Soundappan
Pandurangan, Sripriya
Mohanty, Subrat
Ghule, Vaibhav Haribhau
Sagili, Karuna D.
Prasad, Banuru Muralidhara
Singh, Priyanka
Singh, Kamlesh
Jayaraman, Gurukartick
Rajeswaran, P.
Biswas, Moumita
Mallick, Gayadhar
Naqvi, Ali Jafar
Bharadwaj, Ashwin Kumar
Sathiyanarayanan, K.
Pathak, Aniruddha
Mohan, Nisha
Rao, Raghuram
Kumar, Ajay M. V.
Chadha, Sarabjit Singh
author_sort Shewade, Hemant Deepak
collection PubMed
description Background: Community-based active case finding (ACF) for tuberculosis (TB) implemented among marginalised and vulnerable populations in 285 districts of India resulted in reduction of diagnosis delay and prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis. We were interested to know whether this translated into improved treatment outcomes. Globally, there is limited published literature from marginalised and vulnerable populations on the independent effect of community-based ACF on treatment outcomes when compared to passive case finding (PCF). Objectives: To determine the relative differences in unfavourable treatment outcomes (death, loss-to-follow-up, failure, not evaluated) of ACF and PCF-diagnosed people. Methods: Cohort study involving record reviews and interviews in 18 randomly selected districts. We enrolled all ACF-diagnosed people with new smear-positive pulmonary TB, registered under the national TB programme between March 2016 and February 2017, and an equal number of randomly selected PCF-diagnosed people in the same settings. We used log binomial models to adjust for confounders. Results: Of 572 enrolled, 275 belonged to the ACF and 297 to the PCF group. The proportion of unfavourable outcomes were 10.2% (95% CI: 7.1%, 14.3%) in the ACF and 12.5% (95% CI: 9.2%, 16.7%) in the PCF group (p = 0.468). The association between ACF and unfavourable outcomes remained non-significant after adjusting for confounders available from records [aRR: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.56, 1.21)]. Due to patient non-availability at their residence, interviews were conducted for 465 (81.3%). In the 465 cohort too, there was no association after adjusting for confounders from records and interviews [aRR: 1.05 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.77)]. Conclusion: We did not find significant differences in the treatment outcomes. Due to the wide CIs, studies with larger sample sizes are urgently required. Studies are required to understand how to translate the benefits of ACF to improved treatment outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6735288
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67352882019-09-16 Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes Shewade, Hemant Deepak Gupta, Vivek Satyanarayana, Srinath Kumar, Sunil Pandey, Prabhat Bajpai, U. N. Tripathy, Jaya Prasad Kathirvel, Soundappan Pandurangan, Sripriya Mohanty, Subrat Ghule, Vaibhav Haribhau Sagili, Karuna D. Prasad, Banuru Muralidhara Singh, Priyanka Singh, Kamlesh Jayaraman, Gurukartick Rajeswaran, P. Biswas, Moumita Mallick, Gayadhar Naqvi, Ali Jafar Bharadwaj, Ashwin Kumar Sathiyanarayanan, K. Pathak, Aniruddha Mohan, Nisha Rao, Raghuram Kumar, Ajay M. V. Chadha, Sarabjit Singh Glob Health Action Original Article Background: Community-based active case finding (ACF) for tuberculosis (TB) implemented among marginalised and vulnerable populations in 285 districts of India resulted in reduction of diagnosis delay and prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis. We were interested to know whether this translated into improved treatment outcomes. Globally, there is limited published literature from marginalised and vulnerable populations on the independent effect of community-based ACF on treatment outcomes when compared to passive case finding (PCF). Objectives: To determine the relative differences in unfavourable treatment outcomes (death, loss-to-follow-up, failure, not evaluated) of ACF and PCF-diagnosed people. Methods: Cohort study involving record reviews and interviews in 18 randomly selected districts. We enrolled all ACF-diagnosed people with new smear-positive pulmonary TB, registered under the national TB programme between March 2016 and February 2017, and an equal number of randomly selected PCF-diagnosed people in the same settings. We used log binomial models to adjust for confounders. Results: Of 572 enrolled, 275 belonged to the ACF and 297 to the PCF group. The proportion of unfavourable outcomes were 10.2% (95% CI: 7.1%, 14.3%) in the ACF and 12.5% (95% CI: 9.2%, 16.7%) in the PCF group (p = 0.468). The association between ACF and unfavourable outcomes remained non-significant after adjusting for confounders available from records [aRR: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.56, 1.21)]. Due to patient non-availability at their residence, interviews were conducted for 465 (81.3%). In the 465 cohort too, there was no association after adjusting for confounders from records and interviews [aRR: 1.05 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.77)]. Conclusion: We did not find significant differences in the treatment outcomes. Due to the wide CIs, studies with larger sample sizes are urgently required. Studies are required to understand how to translate the benefits of ACF to improved treatment outcomes. Taylor & Francis 2019-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6735288/ /pubmed/31475635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2019.1656451 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Gupta, Vivek
Satyanarayana, Srinath
Kumar, Sunil
Pandey, Prabhat
Bajpai, U. N.
Tripathy, Jaya Prasad
Kathirvel, Soundappan
Pandurangan, Sripriya
Mohanty, Subrat
Ghule, Vaibhav Haribhau
Sagili, Karuna D.
Prasad, Banuru Muralidhara
Singh, Priyanka
Singh, Kamlesh
Jayaraman, Gurukartick
Rajeswaran, P.
Biswas, Moumita
Mallick, Gayadhar
Naqvi, Ali Jafar
Bharadwaj, Ashwin Kumar
Sathiyanarayanan, K.
Pathak, Aniruddha
Mohan, Nisha
Rao, Raghuram
Kumar, Ajay M. V.
Chadha, Sarabjit Singh
Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title_full Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title_fullStr Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title_short Active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in India: comparison of treatment outcomes
title_sort active versus passive case finding for tuberculosis in marginalised and vulnerable populations in india: comparison of treatment outcomes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6735288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31475635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2019.1656451
work_keys_str_mv AT shewadehemantdeepak activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT guptavivek activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT satyanarayanasrinath activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT kumarsunil activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT pandeyprabhat activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT bajpaiun activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT tripathyjayaprasad activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT kathirvelsoundappan activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT pandurangansripriya activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT mohantysubrat activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT ghulevaibhavharibhau activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT sagilikarunad activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT prasadbanurumuralidhara activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT singhpriyanka activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT singhkamlesh activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT jayaramangurukartick activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT rajeswaranp activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT biswasmoumita activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT mallickgayadhar activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT naqvialijafar activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT bharadwajashwinkumar activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT sathiyanarayanank activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT pathakaniruddha activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT mohannisha activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT raoraghuram activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT kumarajaymv activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes
AT chadhasarabjitsingh activeversuspassivecasefindingfortuberculosisinmarginalisedandvulnerablepopulationsinindiacomparisonoftreatmentoutcomes