基于社区干预的儿童家庭接触者中3个月利福平-异烟肼TPT的安全性。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
B Tchakounte Youngui, B K Tchounga, D Atwine, A Vasiliu, B Cuer, L Simo, R Okello, P Tchendjou, A Kuate Kuate, S Turyahabwe, J Cohn, S M Graham, M Casenghi, M Bonnet
{"title":"基于社区干预的儿童家庭接触者中3个月利福平-异烟肼TPT的安全性。","authors":"B Tchakounte Youngui, B K Tchounga, D Atwine, A Vasiliu, B Cuer, L Simo, R Okello, P Tchendjou, A Kuate Kuate, S Turyahabwe, J Cohn, S M Graham, M Casenghi, M Bonnet","doi":"10.5588/ijtld.24.0311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND: The WHO recommends shorter TB preventive treatment (TPT) regimens and decentralised delivery models to improve effectiveness. This study evaluated the safety of a 3-month rifampicin-isoniazid (3RH) regimen administered by community health workers (CHWs) in households in Cameroon and Uganda.METHODS: A cluster-randomised trial was conducted among child contacts of TB patients. We compared the safety of 3RH delivered by CHWs at home (intervention) vs standard-of-care, facility-based administration of 3RH. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse reactions (ARs). We described the steps from symptom identification by CHWs to classification by a clinician.RESULTS: Of 1,316 children initiated on 3RH, AEs were reported in 8.7% (81/936) in the intervention arm versus 11.3% (43/380) in the standard-of-care arm, <i>P</i> = 0.15. Overall, 37 SAEs occurred in 36 children, all non-medication related. There were 16 ARs reported, occurring in 1.0% (9/936) of children in the intervention arm and 1.6% (6/380) in the standard-of-care arm, <i>P</i> = 0.22. During 4,608 follow-up visits, 21 children reporting AR symptoms were identified by CHWs, 16 were assessed by clinicians, and 4 ARs were confirmed.CONCLUSIONS: The 3RH regimen was safe, including when administered by trained CHWs in community settings, supporting its use in decentralised healthcare models.</p>","PeriodicalId":14411,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease","volume":"29 2","pages":"67-74"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety of 3-month rifampicin-isoniazid TPT in child household contacts in a community-based intervention.\",\"authors\":\"B Tchakounte Youngui, B K Tchounga, D Atwine, A Vasiliu, B Cuer, L Simo, R Okello, P Tchendjou, A Kuate Kuate, S Turyahabwe, J Cohn, S M Graham, M Casenghi, M Bonnet\",\"doi\":\"10.5588/ijtld.24.0311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BACKGROUND: The WHO recommends shorter TB preventive treatment (TPT) regimens and decentralised delivery models to improve effectiveness. This study evaluated the safety of a 3-month rifampicin-isoniazid (3RH) regimen administered by community health workers (CHWs) in households in Cameroon and Uganda.METHODS: A cluster-randomised trial was conducted among child contacts of TB patients. We compared the safety of 3RH delivered by CHWs at home (intervention) vs standard-of-care, facility-based administration of 3RH. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse reactions (ARs). We described the steps from symptom identification by CHWs to classification by a clinician.RESULTS: Of 1,316 children initiated on 3RH, AEs were reported in 8.7% (81/936) in the intervention arm versus 11.3% (43/380) in the standard-of-care arm, <i>P</i> = 0.15. Overall, 37 SAEs occurred in 36 children, all non-medication related. There were 16 ARs reported, occurring in 1.0% (9/936) of children in the intervention arm and 1.6% (6/380) in the standard-of-care arm, <i>P</i> = 0.22. During 4,608 follow-up visits, 21 children reporting AR symptoms were identified by CHWs, 16 were assessed by clinicians, and 4 ARs were confirmed.CONCLUSIONS: The 3RH regimen was safe, including when administered by trained CHWs in community settings, supporting its use in decentralised healthcare models.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"67-74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.24.0311\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.24.0311","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:世卫组织建议缩短结核病预防治疗(TPT)方案和分散交付模式,以提高有效性。本研究评估了喀麦隆和乌干达社区卫生工作者在家庭中实施的为期3个月的利福平-异烟肼(3RH)方案的安全性。方法对结核患者儿童接触者进行整群随机试验。我们比较了chw在家中(干预)提供3RH的安全性与标准护理,以设施为基础的3RH管理。安全性结局包括不良事件(ae)、严重不良事件(sae)和不良反应(ARs)。我们描述了从chw的症状识别到临床医生的分类的步骤。结果在1316名接受3RH治疗的儿童中,干预组的不良事件发生率为8.7%(81/936),而标准治疗组的不良事件发生率为11.3% (43/380),P = 0.15。总的来说,36名儿童中发生了37起SAEs,均与药物无关。有16例急性呼吸道感染报告,干预组发生率为1.0%(9/936),标准护理组发生率为1.6% (6/380),P = 0.22。在4608次随访中,21名报告AR症状的儿童由卫生保健员确定,16名由临床医生评估,4名AR确诊。结论3RH方案是安全的,包括在社区环境中由训练有素的卫生保健员管理,支持在分散的卫生保健模式中使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Safety of 3-month rifampicin-isoniazid TPT in child household contacts in a community-based intervention.

BACKGROUND: The WHO recommends shorter TB preventive treatment (TPT) regimens and decentralised delivery models to improve effectiveness. This study evaluated the safety of a 3-month rifampicin-isoniazid (3RH) regimen administered by community health workers (CHWs) in households in Cameroon and Uganda.METHODS: A cluster-randomised trial was conducted among child contacts of TB patients. We compared the safety of 3RH delivered by CHWs at home (intervention) vs standard-of-care, facility-based administration of 3RH. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse reactions (ARs). We described the steps from symptom identification by CHWs to classification by a clinician.RESULTS: Of 1,316 children initiated on 3RH, AEs were reported in 8.7% (81/936) in the intervention arm versus 11.3% (43/380) in the standard-of-care arm, P = 0.15. Overall, 37 SAEs occurred in 36 children, all non-medication related. There were 16 ARs reported, occurring in 1.0% (9/936) of children in the intervention arm and 1.6% (6/380) in the standard-of-care arm, P = 0.22. During 4,608 follow-up visits, 21 children reporting AR symptoms were identified by CHWs, 16 were assessed by clinicians, and 4 ARs were confirmed.CONCLUSIONS: The 3RH regimen was safe, including when administered by trained CHWs in community settings, supporting its use in decentralised healthcare models.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
266
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease publishes articles on all aspects of lung health, including public health-related issues such as training programmes, cost-benefit analysis, legislation, epidemiology, intervention studies and health systems research. The IJTLD is dedicated to the continuing education of physicians and health personnel and the dissemination of information on tuberculosis and lung health world-wide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信