The effect of primary health care on tuberculosis in a nationwide cohort of 7·3 million Brazilian people: a quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage is one of the WHO End TB Strategy priority interventions and could be achieved-particularly in low-income and middle-income countries-through the expansion of primary health care. We evaluated the effects of one of the largest primary health-care programmes in the world, the Brazilian Family Health Strategy (FHS), on tuberculosis morbidity and mortality using a nationwide cohort of 7·3 million individuals over a 10-year study period. METHODS: We analysed individuals who entered the 100 Million Brazilians Cohort during the period Jan 1, 2004, to Dec 31, 2013, and compared residents in municipalities with no FHS coverage with residents in municipalities with full FHS coverage. We used a cohort design with multivariable Poisson regressions, adjusted for all relevant demographic and socioeconomic variables and weighted with inverse probability of treatment weighting, to estimate the effect of FHS on tuberculosis incidence, mortality, cure, and case fatality. We also performed a range of stratifications and sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: FHS exposure was associated with lower tuberculosis incidence (rate ratio [RR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·72-0·84) and mortality (0·72, 0·55-0·94), and was positively associated with tuberculosis cure rates (1·04, 1·00-1·08). FHS was also associated with a decrease in tuberculosis case-fatality rates, although this was not statistically significant (RR 0·84, 95% CI 0·55-1·30). FHS associations were stronger among the poorest individuals for all the tuberculosis indicators. INTERPRETATION: Community-based primary health care could strongly reduce tuberculosis morbidity and mortality and decrease the unequal distribution of the tuberculosis burden in the most vulnerable populations. During the current marked rise in global poverty due to the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in primary health care could help protect against the expected increases in tuberculosis incidence worldwide and contribute to the attainment of the End TB Strategy goals. FUNDING: TB Modelling and Analysis Consortium (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), Wellcome Trust, and Brazilian Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Estimating underreporting of leprosy in Brazil using a Bayesian approach.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy remains concentrated among the poorest communities in low-and middle-income countries and it is one of the primary infectious causes of disability. Although there have been increasing advances in leprosy surveillance worldwide, leprosy underreporting is still common and can hinder decision-making regarding the distribution of financial and health resources and thereby limit the effectiveness of interventions. In this study, we estimated the proportion of unreported cases of leprosy in Brazilian microregions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Using data collected between 2007 to 2015 from each of the 557 Brazilian microregions, we applied a Bayesian hierarchical model that used the presence of grade 2 leprosy-related physical disabilities as a direct indicator of delayed diagnosis and a proxy for the effectiveness of local leprosy surveillance program. We also analyzed some relevant factors that influence spatial variability in the observed mean incidence rate in the Brazilian microregions, highlighting the importance of socioeconomic factors and how they affect the levels of underreporting. We corrected leprosy incidence rates for each Brazilian microregion and estimated that, on average, 33,252 (9.6%) new leprosy cases went unreported in the country between 2007 to 2015, with this proportion varying from 8.4% to 14.1% across the Brazilian States. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The magnitude and distribution of leprosy underreporting were adequately explained by a model using Grade 2 disability as a marker for the ability of the system to detect new missing cases. The percentage of missed cases was significant, and efforts are warranted to improve leprosy case detection. Our estimates in Brazilian microregions can be used to guide effective interventions, efficient resource allocation, and target actions to mitigate transmission.

Conditional Cash Transfer Program and Leprosy Incidence: Analysis of 12.9 Million Families From the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort.

Leprosy is a neglected tropical disease predominately affecting poor and marginalized populations. To test the hypothesis that poverty-alleviating policies might be associated with reduced leprosy incidence, we evaluated the association between the Brazilian Bolsa Familia (BFP) conditional cash transfer program and new leprosy case detection using linked records from 12,949,730 families in the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort (2007-2014). After propensity score matching BFP beneficiary to nonbeneficiary families, we used Mantel-Haenszel tests and Poisson regressions to estimate incidence rate ratios for new leprosy case detection and secondary endpoints related to operational classification and leprosy-associated disabilities at diagnosis. Overall, cumulative leprosy incidence was 17.4/100,000 person-years at risk (95% CI: 17.1, 17.7) and markedly higher in "priority" (high-burden) versus "nonpriority" (low-burden) municipalities (22.8/100,000 person-years at risk, 95% confidence interval (CI): 22.2, 23.3, compared with 14.3/100,000 person-years at risk, 95% CI: 14.0, 14.7). After matching, BFP participation was not associated with leprosy incidence overall (incidence rate ratio (IRR)Poisson = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.90, 1.04) but was associated with lower leprosy incidence when restricted to families living in high-burden municipalities (IRRPoisson = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77, 0.96). In high-burden municipalities, the association was particularly pronounced for paucibacillary cases (IRRPoisson = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.98) and cases with leprosy-associated disabilities (IRRPoisson = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.97). These findings provide policy-relevant evidence that social policies might contribute to ongoing leprosy control efforts in high-burden communities.

Propensity Score Methods in Health Technology Assessment: Principles, Extended Applications, and Recent Advances.

Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are accepted as the gold-standard approaches to measure effects of intervention or treatment on outcomes. They are also the designs of choice for health technology assessment (HTA). Randomization ensures comparability, in both measured and unmeasured pretreatment characteristics, of individuals assigned to treatment and control or comparator. However, even adequately powered RCTs are not always feasible for several reasons such as cost, time, practical and ethical constraints, and limited generalizability. RCTs rely on data collected on selected, homogeneous population under highly controlled conditions; hence, they provide evidence on efficacy of interventions rather than on effectiveness. Alternatively, observational studies can provide evidence on the relative effectiveness or safety of a health technology compared to one or more alternatives when provided under the setting of routine health care practice. In observational studies, however, treatment assignment is a non-random process based on an individual's baseline characteristics; hence, treatment groups may not be comparable in their pretreatment characteristics. As a result, direct comparison of outcomes between treatment groups might lead to biased estimate of the treatment effect. Propensity score approaches have been used to achieve balance or comparability of treatment groups in terms of their measured pretreatment covariates thereby controlling for confounding bias in estimating treatment effects. Despite the popularity of propensity scores methods and recent important methodological advances, misunderstandings on their applications and limitations are all too common. In this article, we present a review of the propensity scores methods, extended applications, recent advances, and their strengths and limitations.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first BCG vaccination against tuberculosis in school-age children without previous tuberculin test (BCG-REVAC trial): a cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal BCG vaccination is part of routine vaccination schedules in many developing countries; vaccination at school age has not been assessed in trials in low-income and middle-income countries. Catch-up BCG vaccination of school-age children who missed neonatal BCG vaccination could be indicated if it confers protection and is cost-effective. We did a cluster-randomised trial (BCG REVAC) to estimate the effectiveness (efficacy given in routine settings) of school-age vaccination. METHODS: We assessed the effectiveness of BCG vaccination in school-age children (aged 7-14 years) with unknown tuberculin status who did not receive neonatal BCG vaccination (subpopulation of the BCG REVAC cluster-randomised trial), between July, 1997, and June, 2006, in Salvador, Brazil, and between January, 1999, and December, 2007, in Manaus, Brazil. 763 schools were randomly assigned into BCG vaccination group or a not-vaccinated control group. Neither allocation nor intervention was concealed. Incidence of tuberculosis was the primary outcome. Cases were identified via the Brazilian Tuberculosis Control Programme. Study staff were masked to vaccination status when identified cases were linked to the study population. We estimated cost-effectiveness in Salvador by comparison of the cost for vaccination to prevent one case of tuberculosis (censored at 9 years) with the average cost of treating one case of tuberculosis. Analysis of all included children was by intention to treat. For calculation of the incidence rate we used generalised estimating equations and correlated observations over time. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 20,622 children from 385 schools to the BCG vaccination group and 18,507 children from 365 schools to the control group. The crude incidence of tuberculosis was 54·9 (95% CI 45·3-66·7) per 100,000 person-years in the BCG vaccination group and 72·7 (62·8-86·8) per 100,000 person-years in the control group. The overall vaccine effectiveness of a first BCG vaccination at school age was 25% (3-43%). In Salvador, where vaccine effectiveness was 34% (8-53%), vaccination of 381 children would prevent one case of tuberculosis and was cheaper than treatment. The frequency of adverse events was very low with only one axillary lymphadenitis and one ulcer greater than 1 cm in 11,980 BCG vaccinations. INTERPRETATION: Vaccination of school-age children without previous tuberculin testing can reduce the incidence of tuberculosis and could reduce the costs of tuberculosis control. Restriction of BCG vaccination to the first year of life is not in the best interests of the public nor of programmes for tuberculosis control. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, National Health Foundation.