Assessment of the Diagnostic Reliability of Modified Alvarado Scores and Abdominal Ultrasonography in Acute Appendicitis.

Introduction Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency. Clinical assessment plays a major role; however, subtle clinical features in early stages and atypical presentation makes diagnosis challenging. Ultrasonography (USG) of the abdomen is a usual investigation that aids in diagnosis, however, it is operator dependent. A contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) of the abdomen is more accurate; however, it exposes the patient to hazardous radiation. The study aimed to combine clinical assessment and USG abdomen in the reliable diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Objectives The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic reliability of the Modified Alvarado Score and ultrasonography of the abdomen in acute appendicitis. Material and methods All patients with right iliac fossa pain, clinically suspected of having acute appendicitis, admitted to the department of general surgery, Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS), Bhubaneswar, between January 2019 and July 2020, who gave consent were included. Clinically, Modified Alvarado Score (MAS) was calculated, after which patients were subjected to USG abdomen, where findings were noted and a sonologic score was calculated. The study group was the patients who needed appendicectomy (n=138). Operative findings were noted. Histopathological diagnosis of acute appendicitis was deemed as confirmatory in these cases and was correlated with MAS and USG scores to determine diagnostic accuracy. Results A combined clinicoradiological (MAS + USG) score of seven showed a sensitivity of 81.8% and a specificity of 100%. The specificity of score seven or above was 100%; however, the sensitivity at 81.8%. The diagnostic accuracy of the clinicoradiological was 87.5%. The negative appendicectomy rate was 4.34%, with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis being confirmed for 95.7% of patients upon histopathological examination. Conclusion The MAS and USG of the abdomen, which is an affordable and non-invasive tool, showed increased diagnostic reliability, and hence it can help reduce the use of CECT abdomen, as CECT abdomen is considered as a gold standard for confirmation or exclusion of diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Use of the combined scoring system of MAS and USG abdomen can be used as a cost-effective alternative.

Impact of Advocacy, Communication, Social Mobilization and Active Case Finding on TB Notification in Jharkhand, India.

Community-level benefits of screening for active tuberculosis (TB) disease remain uncertain. Project Axshya (meaning free of TB) conducted advocacy, communication, social mobilization, and active case finding among vulnerable/marginalized populations of India. Among 15 districts of Jharkhand state, the project was initiated in 36 subdistrict level administrative units - tuberculosis units (TUs) in a staggered manner between April 2013 and September 2014, and continued till the end of 2015. Seven TUs did not implement the project. We assessed the relative change in the quarterly TB case finding indicators (n = 4) after inclusion of a TU within the project. By fitting four multilevel models (mixed-effects maximum likelihood regression using random intercept), we adjusted for secular (over previous five quarters) and seasonal trends, baseline differences within Axshya and non-Axshya TUs, and population size and clustering within districts and within TUs. After inclusion of a TU within the project, we found a significant increase [95% confidence interval (CI)] in TU-level presumptive TB sputum examination rate, new sputum-positive TB Case Notification Rate (CNR), sputum-positive TB CNR, and all forms TB CNR by 12 (5.5, 18.5), 1.1 (0.5, 1.7), 1.3 (0.6, 2.0), and 1.2 (0.1, 2.2) per 100,000 population per quarter, respectively. Overall, the project resulted in an increase (95% CI) in sputum examination and detection of new sputum-positive TB, sputum-positive TB and all forms of TB patients by 22,410 (10,203, 34,077), 2066 (923, 3210), 2380 (1162, 3616), and 2122 (203, 4059), respectively. This provides evidence for implementing project Axshya over and above the existing passive case finding.

Active case finding among marginalised and vulnerable populations reduces catastrophic costs due to tuberculosis diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on whether active case finding (ACF) among marginalised and vulnerable populations mitigates the financial burden during tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of ACF among marginalised and vulnerable populations on prevalence and inequity of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis among TB-affected households when compared with passive case finding (PCF). METHODS: In 18 randomly sampled ACF districts in India, during March 2016 to February 2017, we enrolled all new sputum-smear-positive TB patients detected through ACF and an equal number of randomly selected patients detected through PCF. Direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs due to TB diagnosis were collected through patient interviews at their residence. We defined costs due to TB diagnosis as 'catastrophic' if the total costs (direct and indirect) due to TB diagnosis exceeded 20% of annual pre-TB household income. We used concentration curves and indices to assess the extent of inequity. RESULTS: When compared with patients detected through PCF (n = 231), ACF patients (n = 234) incurred lower median total costs (US$ 4.6 and 20.4, p < 0.001). The prevalence of catastrophic costs in ACF and PCF was 10.3 and 11.5% respectively. Adjusted analysis showed that patients detected through ACF had a 32% lower prevalence of catastrophic costs relative to PCF [adjusted prevalence ratio (95% CI): 0.68 (0.69, 0.97)]. The concentration indices (95% CI) for total costs in both ACF [-0.15 (-0.32, 0.11)] and PCF [-0.06 (-0.20, 0.08)] were not significantly different from the line of equality and each other. The concentration indices (95% CI) for catastrophic costs in both ACF [-0.60 (-0.81, -0.39)] and PCF [-0.58 (-0.78, -0.38)] were not significantly different from each other: however, both the curves had a significant distribution among the poorest quintiles. CONCLUSION: ACF among marginalised and vulnerable populations reduced total costs and prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis, but could not address inequity.

Status of Tuberculosis services in Indian Prisons.

INTRODUCTION: Prisons are known to be a high risk environment for tuberculosis (TB) due to overcrowding, low levels of nutrition, poor infection control and lack of accessible healthcare services. India has nearly 1400 prisons housing 0.37 million inmates. However, information on, availability of diagnostic and treatment services for TB in the prison settings is limited. This study examined the availability of TB services in prisons of India. Simultaneously, prison inmates were screened for tuberculosis. METHOD: The study was conducted in 157 prisons across 300 districts between July-December 2013. Information on services available and practices followed for screening, diagnosis and treatment of TB was collected. Additionally, the inmates and prison staff were sensitised on TB using interpersonal communication materials. The inmates were screened for cough ≥2 weeks as a symptom of TB. Those identified as presumptive TB patients (PTBP) were linked with free diagnostic and treatment services. RESULTS: Diagnostic and treatment services for TB were available in 18% and 54% of the prisons respectively. Only half of the prisons screened inmates for TB on entry, while nearly 60% practised periodic screening of inmates. District level prisons (OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.6-22.1), prisons with more than 500 inmates (OR, 52; 95% CI, 1.4-19.2), and prisons practising periodic screening of inmates (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.0-7.2) were more likely to diagnose TB cases. 19% of the inmates screened had symptoms of TB (cough ≥2 weeks) and 8% of the PTBP were diagnosed with TB on smear microscopy. CONCLUSION: The TB screening, diagnostic and treatment services are sub-optimal in prisons in India and need to be strengthened urgently.

From where are tuberculosis patients accessing treatment in India? Results from a cross-sectional community based survey of 30 districts.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) notification in India by the Revised National TB Control Programme (RNTCP) provides information on TB patients registered for treatment from the programme. There is limited information about the proportion of patients treated for TB outside RNTCP and where these patients access their treatment. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the proportion of patients accessing TB treatment outside the RNTCP and to identify their basic demographic characteristics. METHODS: A cross sectional community-based survey in 30 districts. Patients were identified through a door-to-door survey and interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the estimated 75,000 households enumerated, 73,249 households (97.6%) were visited. Of the 371,174 household members, 761 TB patients were identified (∼205 cases per 100,000 populations). Data were collected from 609 (80%) TB patients of which 331 [54% (95% CI: 42-66%)] were determined to be taking treatment 'under DOTS/RNTCP'. The remaining 278 [46% (95% CI: 34-57%)] were on treatment from 'outside DOTS/RNTCP' sources and hence were unlikely to be part of the TB notification system. Patients who were accessing treatment from 'outside DOTS/RNTCP' were more likely to be patients from rural areas [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 2.5, 95% CI (1.2-5.3)] and whose TB was diagnosed in a non-government health facility (aOR 14.0, 95% CI 7.9-24.9). CONCLUSIONS: This community-based survey found that nearly half of self-reported TB patients were missed by TB notification system in these districts. The study highlights the need for 1) Reviewing and revising the scope of the TB notification system, 2) Strengthening and monitoring health care delivery systems with periodic assessment of the reach and utilisation of the RNTCP services especially among rural communities, 3) Advocacy, communication and social mobilisation activities focused at rural communities with low household incomes and 4) Inclusive involvement of all health-care providers, especially providers of poor rural communities.