Cargando…

Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India

BACKGROUND: There are few rigorous studies comparing quality of tuberculosis (TB) care in public versus private sectors. METHODS: We used standardised patients (SPs) to measure technical quality and patient experience in a sample of private and public facilities in Mumbai. RESULTS: SPs presented a ‘...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Daniels, Benjamin, Shah, Daksha, Kwan, Ada T, Das, Ranendra, Das, Veena, Puri, Varsha, Tipre, Pranita, Waghmare, Upalimitra, Gomare, Mangala, Keskar, Padmaja, Das, Jishnu, Pai, Madhukar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9582305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36261230
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009657
_version_ 1784812803019767808
author Daniels, Benjamin
Shah, Daksha
Kwan, Ada T
Das, Ranendra
Das, Veena
Puri, Varsha
Tipre, Pranita
Waghmare, Upalimitra
Gomare, Mangala
Keskar, Padmaja
Das, Jishnu
Pai, Madhukar
author_facet Daniels, Benjamin
Shah, Daksha
Kwan, Ada T
Das, Ranendra
Das, Veena
Puri, Varsha
Tipre, Pranita
Waghmare, Upalimitra
Gomare, Mangala
Keskar, Padmaja
Das, Jishnu
Pai, Madhukar
author_sort Daniels, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are few rigorous studies comparing quality of tuberculosis (TB) care in public versus private sectors. METHODS: We used standardised patients (SPs) to measure technical quality and patient experience in a sample of private and public facilities in Mumbai. RESULTS: SPs presented a ‘classic, suspected TB’ scenario and a ‘recurrence or drug-resistance’ scenario. In the private sector, SPs completed 643 interactions. In the public sector, 164 interactions. Outcomes included indicators of correct management, medication use and client experience. Public providers used microbiological testing (typically, microscopy) more frequently, in 123 of 164 (75%; 95% CI 68% to 81%) vs 223 of 644 interactions (35%; 95% CI 31% to 38%) in the private sector. Private providers were more likely to order chest X-rays, in 556 of 639 interactions (86%; 95% CI 84% to 89%). According to national TB guidelines, we found higher proportions of correct management in the public sector (75% vs 35%; (adjusted) difference 35 percentage points (pp); 95% CI 25 to 46). If X-rays were considered acceptable for the first case but drug-susceptibility testing was required for the second case, the private sector correctly managed a slightly higher proportion of interactions (67% vs 51%; adjusted difference 16 pp; 95% CI 7 to 25). Broad-spectrum antibiotics were used in 76% (95% CI 66% to 84%) of the interactions in public hospitals, and 61% (95% CI 58% to 65%) in private facilities. Costs in the private clinics averaged rupees INR 512 (95% CI 485 to 539); public facilities charged INR 10. Private providers spent more time with patients (4.4 min vs 2.4 min; adjusted difference 2.0 min; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.9) and asked a greater share of relevant questions (29% vs 43%; adjusted difference 13.7 pp; 95% CI 8.2 to 19.3). CONCLUSIONS: While the public providers did a better job of adhering to national TB guidelines (especially microbiological testing) and offered less expensive care, private sector providers did better on client experience.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9582305
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95823052022-10-21 Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India Daniels, Benjamin Shah, Daksha Kwan, Ada T Das, Ranendra Das, Veena Puri, Varsha Tipre, Pranita Waghmare, Upalimitra Gomare, Mangala Keskar, Padmaja Das, Jishnu Pai, Madhukar BMJ Glob Health Original Research BACKGROUND: There are few rigorous studies comparing quality of tuberculosis (TB) care in public versus private sectors. METHODS: We used standardised patients (SPs) to measure technical quality and patient experience in a sample of private and public facilities in Mumbai. RESULTS: SPs presented a ‘classic, suspected TB’ scenario and a ‘recurrence or drug-resistance’ scenario. In the private sector, SPs completed 643 interactions. In the public sector, 164 interactions. Outcomes included indicators of correct management, medication use and client experience. Public providers used microbiological testing (typically, microscopy) more frequently, in 123 of 164 (75%; 95% CI 68% to 81%) vs 223 of 644 interactions (35%; 95% CI 31% to 38%) in the private sector. Private providers were more likely to order chest X-rays, in 556 of 639 interactions (86%; 95% CI 84% to 89%). According to national TB guidelines, we found higher proportions of correct management in the public sector (75% vs 35%; (adjusted) difference 35 percentage points (pp); 95% CI 25 to 46). If X-rays were considered acceptable for the first case but drug-susceptibility testing was required for the second case, the private sector correctly managed a slightly higher proportion of interactions (67% vs 51%; adjusted difference 16 pp; 95% CI 7 to 25). Broad-spectrum antibiotics were used in 76% (95% CI 66% to 84%) of the interactions in public hospitals, and 61% (95% CI 58% to 65%) in private facilities. Costs in the private clinics averaged rupees INR 512 (95% CI 485 to 539); public facilities charged INR 10. Private providers spent more time with patients (4.4 min vs 2.4 min; adjusted difference 2.0 min; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.9) and asked a greater share of relevant questions (29% vs 43%; adjusted difference 13.7 pp; 95% CI 8.2 to 19.3). CONCLUSIONS: While the public providers did a better job of adhering to national TB guidelines (especially microbiological testing) and offered less expensive care, private sector providers did better on client experience. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9582305/ /pubmed/36261230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009657 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Daniels, Benjamin
Shah, Daksha
Kwan, Ada T
Das, Ranendra
Das, Veena
Puri, Varsha
Tipre, Pranita
Waghmare, Upalimitra
Gomare, Mangala
Keskar, Padmaja
Das, Jishnu
Pai, Madhukar
Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title_full Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title_fullStr Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title_full_unstemmed Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title_short Tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in Mumbai, India
title_sort tuberculosis diagnosis and management in the public versus private sector: a standardised patients study in mumbai, india
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9582305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36261230
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009657
work_keys_str_mv AT danielsbenjamin tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT shahdaksha tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT kwanadat tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT dasranendra tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT dasveena tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT purivarsha tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT tiprepranita tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT waghmareupalimitra tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT gomaremangala tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT keskarpadmaja tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT dasjishnu tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia
AT paimadhukar tuberculosisdiagnosisandmanagementinthepublicversusprivatesectorastandardisedpatientsstudyinmumbaiindia