{"title":"Effectiveness of Community-Based Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis Treatment in Nigeria: A Retrospective Cohort Study","authors":"A. Abubakar, A. Parsa, S. Walker","doi":"10.37745/ijphpp.15/vol8n12747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Growing multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) worldwide and new effective and affordable treatment modalities required exploring options such as the community model of MDR-TB treatment (CM), as introduced in Nigeria.To determine the most effective care model by comparing MDR-TB treatment outcomes at community-based sites with the hospital-based model of care in Nigeria.Treatment outcomes data were retrospectively accessed from the medical record of 423 MDR-TB patients to evaluate the effectiveness of HM and CM based on WHO criteria. Treatment success” is defined as the sum of cure and treatment completion. “Cure” is the “treatment completion” with at least three negative cultures taken at least 30 days apart after the intensive phase in the absence of “treatment failure. Predictors of treatment outcomes were also assessed on multivariate analysis. 423 patients (85% of the targeted sampling data) were available for analysis, of whom 272 (63.4%) had a conventional regimen, and 143 (33.8%) had a shorter treatment regimen. There is no significant difference in treatment outcomes between CM and HM; patients achieve similar treatment success in all models, 65.5% with HM compared to 68% at the CM (p = 0.608). Treatment failure was (4.1% versus 5.1%) in the HM versus CM, respectively; (p = 0.704). Death occurred in 20.9% of participants in the hospital model and 17.5% in the community model, and rates of Loss to follow-up were similar 9.5% HM vs 9.5% CM; (p = 0.704). On multivariate analysis, adjusting for age, HIV, sex, patient type, TB treatment history, resistance pattern, model of care and regimens, there was no change in treatment outcomes if patients were treated at the CM vs HM (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.92; 95% CI 0.59 – 1.46, p = 0.735). MDR-TB patients with unknown HIV status (not on ART) were nine times more likely to have unsuccessful treatment outcomes compared with HIV-negative respondents (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.83; 95% CI 1.79 – 43.60, p = 0.007). Similarly, HIV-positive respondents were 1.3 times more likely to have unsuccessful outcomes than HIV-negative (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.26; 95% CI 0.71–2.26, p = 0.429, but the difference is not statistically significant. This retrospective study found that the community-based model is equally effective as care in a centralised hospital, based on similar treatment success rates, comparable default and death rates with hospital care and shorter time to treatment initiation at the community-based centres.","PeriodicalId":295840,"journal":{"name":"nternational Journal of Public Health Pharmacy and Pharmacology","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"nternational Journal of Public Health Pharmacy and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37745/ijphpp.15/vol8n12747","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Growing multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) worldwide and new effective and affordable treatment modalities required exploring options such as the community model of MDR-TB treatment (CM), as introduced in Nigeria.To determine the most effective care model by comparing MDR-TB treatment outcomes at community-based sites with the hospital-based model of care in Nigeria.Treatment outcomes data were retrospectively accessed from the medical record of 423 MDR-TB patients to evaluate the effectiveness of HM and CM based on WHO criteria. Treatment success” is defined as the sum of cure and treatment completion. “Cure” is the “treatment completion” with at least three negative cultures taken at least 30 days apart after the intensive phase in the absence of “treatment failure. Predictors of treatment outcomes were also assessed on multivariate analysis. 423 patients (85% of the targeted sampling data) were available for analysis, of whom 272 (63.4%) had a conventional regimen, and 143 (33.8%) had a shorter treatment regimen. There is no significant difference in treatment outcomes between CM and HM; patients achieve similar treatment success in all models, 65.5% with HM compared to 68% at the CM (p = 0.608). Treatment failure was (4.1% versus 5.1%) in the HM versus CM, respectively; (p = 0.704). Death occurred in 20.9% of participants in the hospital model and 17.5% in the community model, and rates of Loss to follow-up were similar 9.5% HM vs 9.5% CM; (p = 0.704). On multivariate analysis, adjusting for age, HIV, sex, patient type, TB treatment history, resistance pattern, model of care and regimens, there was no change in treatment outcomes if patients were treated at the CM vs HM (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.92; 95% CI 0.59 – 1.46, p = 0.735). MDR-TB patients with unknown HIV status (not on ART) were nine times more likely to have unsuccessful treatment outcomes compared with HIV-negative respondents (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.83; 95% CI 1.79 – 43.60, p = 0.007). Similarly, HIV-positive respondents were 1.3 times more likely to have unsuccessful outcomes than HIV-negative (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.26; 95% CI 0.71–2.26, p = 0.429, but the difference is not statistically significant. This retrospective study found that the community-based model is equally effective as care in a centralised hospital, based on similar treatment success rates, comparable default and death rates with hospital care and shorter time to treatment initiation at the community-based centres.
世界范围内耐多药结核病(MDR-TB)的增长以及新的有效和负担得起的治疗方式需要探索各种选择,例如尼日利亚采用的耐多药结核病社区治疗模式(CM)。通过比较尼日利亚以社区为基础的耐多药结核病治疗结果和以医院为基础的治疗模式,确定最有效的治疗模式。从423名耐多药结核病患者的病历中回顾性获取治疗结果数据,根据世卫组织标准评估HM和CM的有效性。“治疗成功”的定义是治愈和治疗完成的总和。“治愈”是指“治疗完成”,在没有“治疗失败”的情况下,在强化阶段后至少间隔30天进行至少三次阴性培养。治疗结果的预测因素也通过多变量分析进行评估。423例患者(占目标抽样数据的85%)可用于分析,其中272例(63.4%)采用常规治疗方案,143例(33.8%)采用较短的治疗方案。CM组与HM组治疗结果无显著差异;所有模型患者的治疗成功率相似,HM组为65.5%,而CM组为68% (p = 0.608)。HM组和CM组的治疗失败率分别为4.1%和5.1%;(p = 0.704)。在医院模型中,20.9%的参与者死亡,在社区模型中,17.5%的参与者死亡,随访失踪率相似,9.5% HM vs 9.5% CM;(p = 0.704)。在多因素分析中,调整了年龄、HIV、性别、患者类型、结核病治疗史、耐药模式、护理模式和方案,如果患者在CM和HM治疗,治疗结果没有变化(校正优势比[aOR] 0.92;95% CI 0.59 - 1.46, p = 0.735)。与艾滋病毒阴性的应答者相比,艾滋病毒感染状况未知(未接受抗逆转录病毒治疗)的耐多药结核病患者治疗结果不成功的可能性高9倍(调整后的优势比[aOR] 8.83;95% CI 1.79 - 43.60, p = 0.007)。同样,hiv阳性应答者失败的可能性是hiv阴性应答者的1.3倍(调整后的优势比[aOR] 1.26;95% CI 0.71-2.26, p = 0.429,但差异无统计学意义。这项回顾性研究发现,基于与医院护理相似的治疗成功率、相似的违约率和死亡率以及社区中心较短的开始治疗时间,社区模式与集中式医院的护理同样有效。