Nonadherence to anti-tuberculosis treatment, reasons and associated factors among pulmonary tuberculosis patients in the communities in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) is the world's major public health problem. We assessed the proportion, reasons, and associated factors for anti-TB treatment nonadherence in the communities in Indonesia. METHODS: This national coverage cross-sectional survey was conducted from 2013 to 2014 with stratified multi-stage cluster sampling. Based on the region and rural-urban location. The 156 clusters were distributed in 136 districts/cities throughout 33 provinces, divided into three areas. An eligible population of age ≥15 was interviewed to find TB symptoms and screened with a thorax x-ray. Those whose filtered result detected positive followed an assessment of Sputum microscopy, LJ culture, and Xpert MTB/RIF. Census officers asked all participants about their history of TB and their treatment-defined Nonadherence as discontinuation of anti-tuberculosis treatment for <6 months. Data were analyzed using STATA 14.0 (College Station, TX, USA). RESULTS: Nonadherence to anti-TB treatment proportion was 27.24%. Multivariate analysis identified behavioral factors significantly associated with anti-TB treatment nonadherence, such as smoking (OR = 1.78, 95% CI (1.47-2.16)); place of first treatment received: government hospital (OR = 1.45, 95% CI:1.06-1.99); private hospital (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.38-2.72); private practitioner (OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.56-3.23); socio-demographic and TB status included region: Sumatera (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.05-1.98); other areas (OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.30-2.61); low level of education (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.27-2.03); and current TB positive status (OR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.26-3.73). CONCLUSIONS: Nonadherence to anti-TB drugs was highly related to the personal perception of the respondents, despite smoking, current TB status, a place for the first treatment, education, and region. The position of the first TB treatment at the private practitioner was significantly associated with the risk of Nonadherence to treatment.

Policy to expand hospital utilization in disadvantaged areas in Indonesia: who should be the target?

BACKGROUND: The disadvantaged areas are one of the government's focuses in accelerating development in Indonesia, including the health sector. The study aims to determine the target for expanding hospital utilization in disadvantaged areas in Indonesia. METHODS: The study employed the 2018 Indonesian Basic Health Survey data. This cross-sectional study analyzed 42,644 respondents. The study used nine independent variables: residence, age, gender, marital, education, employment, wealth, insurance, and travel time, in addition to hospital utilization, as a dependent variable. The study employed binary logistic regression to evaluate the data. RESULTS: The results found that average hospital utilization in disadvantaged areas in Indonesia in 2018 was 3.7%. Urban areas are 1.045 times more likely than rural areas to utilize the hospital (95% CI 1.032-1.058). The study also found age has a relationship with hospital utilization. Females are 1.656 times more likely than males to use the hospital (95% CI 1.639-1.673). Moreover, the study found marital status has a relationship with hospital utilization. The higher the education level, the higher the hospital utilization. Employed individuals have a 0.748 possibility to use the hospital compared with those unemployed (95% CI 0.740-0.757). Wealthy individuals have more chances of using the hospital than poor individuals. Individuals with all insurance types are more likely to utilize the hospital than those uninsured. Individuals with travel times of ≤ 1 h are 2.510 more likely to use the hospital than those with > 1 h (95% CI 2.483-2.537). CONCLUSION: The specific targets to accelerate the increase in hospital utilization in disadvantaged areas in Indonesia are living in a rural area, being male, never in a union, having no education, being employed, being the poorest, uninsured, and having a travel time of > 1 h. The government should make a policy addressing the problem based on the research findings.