Tobacco smoking clusters in households affected by tuberculosis in an individual participant data meta-analysis of national tuberculosis prevalence surveys: Time for household-wide interventions?

Tuberculosis (TB) and non-communicable diseases (NCD) share predisposing risk factors. TB-associated NCD might cluster within households affected with TB requiring shared prevention and care strategies. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis of national TB prevalence surveys to determine whether NCD cluster in members of households with TB. We identified eligible surveys that reported at least one NCD or NCD risk factor through the archive maintained by the World Health Organization and searching in Medline and Embase from 1 January 2000 to 10 August 2021, which was updated on 23 March 2023. We compared the prevalence of NCD and their risk factors between people who do not have TB living in households with at least one person with TB (members of households with TB), and members of households without TB. We included 16 surveys (n = 740,815) from Asia and Africa. In a multivariable model adjusted for age and gender, the odds of smoking was higher among members of households with TB (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.23; 95% CI: 1.11-1.38), compared with members of households without TB. The analysis did not find a significant difference in the prevalence of alcohol drinking, diabetes, hypertension, or BMI between members of households with and without TB. Studies evaluating household-wide interventions for smoking to reduce its dual impact on TB and NCD may be warranted. Systematically screening for NCD using objective diagnostic methods is needed to understand the actual burden of NCD and inform comprehensive interventions.

Association of diabetes, smoking, and alcohol use with subclinical-to-symptomatic spectrum of tuberculosis in 16 countries: an individual participant data meta-analysis of national tuberculosis prevalence surveys.

Background: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and NCD risk factors, such as smoking, increase the risk for tuberculosis (TB). Data are scarce on the risk of prevalent TB associated with these factors in the context of population-wide systematic screening and on the association between NCDs and NCD risk factors with different manifestations of TB, where ∼50% being asymptomatic but bacteriologically positive (subclinical). We did an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of national and sub-national TB prevalence surveys to synthesise the evidence on the risk of symptomatic and subclinical TB in people with NCDs or risk factors, which could help countries to plan screening activities. Methods: In this systematic review and IPD meta-analysis, we identified eligible prevalence surveys in low-income and middle-income countries that reported at least one NCD (e.g., diabetes) or NCD risk factor (e.g., smoking, alcohol use) through the archive maintained by the World Health Organization and by searching in Medline and Embase from January 1, 2000 to August 10, 2021. The search was updated on March 23, 2023. We performed a one-stage meta-analysis using multivariable multinomial models. We estimated the proportion of and the odds ratio for subclinical and symptomatic TB compared to people without TB for current smoking, alcohol use, and self-reported diabetes, adjusted for age and gender. Subclinical TB was defined as microbiologically confirmed TB without symptoms of current cough, fever, night sweats, or weight loss and symptomatic TB with at least one of these symptoms. We assessed heterogeneity using forest plots and I2 statistic. Missing variables were imputed through multi-level multiple imputation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021272679). Findings: We obtained IPD from 16 national surveys out of 21 national and five sub-national surveys identified (five in Asia and 11 in Africa, N = 740,815). Across surveys, 15.1%-56.7% of TB were subclinical (median: 38.1%). In the multivariable model, current smoking was associated with both subclinical (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.40) and symptomatic TB (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.34-1.66). Self-reported diabetes was associated with symptomatic TB (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.17-2.40) but not with subclinical TB (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.55-1.55). For alcohol drinking ≥ twice per week vs no alcohol drinking, the estimates were imprecise (OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.70-3.62) for subclinical TB and OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.59-3.46 for symptomatic TB). For the association between current smoking and symptomatic TB, I2 was high (76.5% (95% CI 62.0-85.4), while the direction of the point estimates was consistent except for three surveys with wide CIs. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that current smokers are more likely to have both symptomatic and subclinical TB. These individuals can, therefore, be prioritised for intensified screening, such as the use of chest X-ray in the context of community-based screening. People with self-reported diabetes are also more likely to have symptomatic TB, but the association is unclear for subclinical TB. Funding: None.

Enhancing Tuberculosis Case-Finding: A Case of Quality Improvement Initiative in Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Tanzania is 1 of the 30 high TB burden countries and 1 of the 13 countries in which 75% of people with TB are unaccounted for and that is prioritized for the Global Fund Catalytic investment and Strategic Initiative support. Tanzania decided to strengthen its National TB Programme to find these people with TB who are unaccounted for by identifying evidence-driven innovations to deliver high-quality services and to improve the efficiency of TB case-finding. A quality improvement (QI) initiative was implemented by the National Tuberculosis and Leprosy Programme to enhance TB case-finding. The initiative involved identifying gaps in the quality of services, introducing new tools, improving the work capacity of health care workers through training and mentorship sessions, strengthening laboratory and referral services, and implementing mandatory TB screening of all patients attending health facilities. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of QI initiative to enhance TB case-findings at the health facility level. METHOD: A cross-sectional design, and intervention and control facilities randomly selected for an evaluation of the QI initiative were used. Twenty facilities from the Dodoma region across all health care system levels (dispensaries, health centres, and hospitals) were involved in this evaluation. The facilities were randomly divided into either the intervention or control groups at a 1:1 ratio (10 intervention and 10 control facilities). Data routinely collected from program registers from January 2016 to June 2017 were used. RESULT: The evaluation registered a 52% increase in TB case notification in Q1 of 2017 compared with in Q1 of 2016 and, similarly, a 52% increase in Q2 of 2017 compared with in Q2 of 2016, with 9 out of 10 intervention sites reporting increases in their quarterly TB case notifications. There were no positive changes in the 'control facilities' where routine services were provided, with half of the facilities showing a decrease in TB case notification from baseline. CONCLUSION: This QI initiative has the potential to support a long-term comprehensive approach to ending TB and to improve the quality of the foundations of the health care system. This initiative sets a reliable pace for health facilities to efficiently respond to and manage TB case-finding interventions put into action. Tanzania's experience with implementing QI interventions could serve as a model for improving TB case notifications in other settings.

PEP4LEP study protocol: integrated skin screening and SDR-PEP administration for leprosy prevention: comparing the effectiveness and feasibility of a community-based intervention to a health centre-based intervention in Ethiopia, Mozambique and Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: Leprosy, or Hansen's disease, remains a cause of preventable disability. Early detection, treatment and prevention are key to reducing transmission. Post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDR-PEP) reduces the risk of developing leprosy when administered to screened contacts of patients. This has been adopted in the WHO leprosy guidelines. The PEP4LEP study aims to determine the most effective and feasible method of screening people at risk of developing leprosy and administering chemoprophylaxis to contribute to interrupting transmission. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PEP4LEP is a cluster-randomised implementation trial comparing two interventions of integrated skin screening combined with SDR-PEP distribution to contacts of patients with leprosy in Ethiopia, Mozambique and Tanzania. One intervention is community-based, using skin camps to screen approximately 100 community contacts per leprosy patient, and to administer SDR-PEP when eligible. The other intervention is health centre-based, inviting household contacts of leprosy patients to be screened in a local health centre and subsequently receive SDR-PEP when eligible. The mobile health (mHealth) tool SkinApp will support health workers' capacity in integrated skin screening. The effectiveness of both interventions will be compared by assessing the rate of patients with leprosy detected and case detection delay in months, as well as feasibility in terms of cost-effectiveness and acceptability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the national ethical committees of Ethiopia (MoSHE), Mozambique (CNBS) and Tanzania (NIMR/MoHCDEC). Study results will be published open access in peer-reviewed journals, providing evidence for the implementation of innovative leprosy screening methods and chemoprophylaxis to policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL7294 (NTR7503).

Prolaxis post-exposición para lepra con dosis única de rifampicina: manual para su implementación / No disponible

OBJETIVO: La profilaxis post-exposición de la lepra con dosis única de rifampicina (SDR-PEP) ha demostrado ser efectiva y aplicable y está recomendada por la OMS desde 2018. Esta caja de herramientas SDR-PEP se desarrolló a través de la experiencia de la profilaxis lepra post-eliminación (LPEP). Se ha diseñado para facilitar y estandarizar la implementación del seguimiento de contactos y la administración SDR-PEP en regiones y países que iniciaron la intervención. RESULTADOS: Se desarrollaron cuatro instrumentos, incorporando la evidencia existente actual para SDR-PEP y los métodos y enseñanzas del proyecto LPEP en ocho países. (1) El conjunto de diapositivas Powerpoint política/apoyo que ayudarán a los programadores sobre la evidencia, practicabilidad y recursos necesarios para SDR-PEP, (2) La colección de diapositivas PowerPoint sobre formación e implementación en el campo para formar al personal implicado en el seguimiento de contactos y PEP con SDR, (3) manual genérico de campo SDR-PEP que puede ser usado para formar un protocolo específico de campo para el seguimiento de contactos y SDR-PEP como referencia para el personal directamente implicado. Finalmente, (4) el manual director SDR-PEP, que resume los distintos componentes de la caja de herramientas y contiene las instrucciones para su uso. CONCLUSIÓN: En respuesta al interés manifestado por varios países de implementar el seguimiento de contactos de lepra con PEP con SDR, con las recomendaciones OMS sobre SDR-PEP, esta caja de herramientas basada en la evidencia concreta pero flexible, ha sido diseñada para servir a los directores de programas nacionales de lepra con un medio práctico para trasladar los planteamientos a la práctica. Está disponible gratuitamente en la página de Infolep y actualizada constantemente: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-post-exposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme

OBJECTIVE: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. RESULTS: Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. CONCLUSION: In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme

Prolaxis post-exposición para lepra con dosis única de rifampicina: manual para su implementación / Post-exposure prolaxis for leprosy with a single dose of rifampicin: a manual for its implementation

Objetivo: La profilaxis post-exposición de la lepra con dosis única de rifampicina (SDR-PEP) ha demostrado ser efectiva y aplicable y está recomendada por la OMS desde 2018. Esta caja de herramientas SDR-PEP se desarrolló a través de la experiencia de la profilaxis lepra post-eliminación (LPEP). Se ha diseñado para facilitar y estandarizar la implementación del seguimiento de contactos y la administración SDR-PEP en regiones y países que iniciaron la intervención. Resultados: Se desarrollaron cuatro instrumentos, incorporando la evidencia existente actual para SDR-PEP y los métodos y enseñanzas del proyecto LPEP en ocho países. (1) El conjunto de diapositivas Powerpoint política/apoyo que ayudarán a los programadores sobre la evidencia, practicabilidad y recursos necesarios para SDR-PEP, (2) La colección de diapositivas PowerPoint sobre formación e implementación en el campo para formar al personal implicado en el seguimiento de contactos y PEP con SDR, (3) manual genérico de campo SDR-PEP que puede ser usado para formar un protocolo específico de campo para el seguimiento de contactos y SDR-PEP como referencia para el personal directamente implicado. Finalmente, (4) el manual director SDR-PEP, que resume los distintos componentes de la caja de herramientas y contiene las instrucciones para su uso. Conclusión: En respuesta al interés manifestado por varios países de implementar el seguimiento de contactos de lepra con PEP con SDR, con las recomendaciones OMS sobre SDR-PEP, esta caja de herramientas basada en la evidencia concreta pero flexible, ha sido diseñada para servir a los directores de programas nacionales de lepra con un medio práctico para trasladar los planteamientos a la práctica. Está disponible gratuitamente en la página de Infolep y actualizada constantemente: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-post-exposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

Objective: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. Results: Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. Conclusion: In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

Programa post-exposición a la profilaxis de la Lepra (LPEP): Actualización y análisis interno / No disponible

Se requieren nuevos planteamientos para incrementar el control de la lepra, disminuir el número de personas afectadas y cortar la transmisión. Para conseguir este objetivo las mejores soluciones son la detección precoz. El cribaje de contactos y la quimioprofilaxis. El Programa Profilaxis Post-exposición a la Lepra (LPEP) ayuda a demostrar la viabilidad de integrar el rastreo de contactos y dosis única de rifampicina (SDR) en las actividades rutinarias de control de la enfermedad. El programa LPEP está implementado entre los programas de control de la lepra de Brasil, Camboya, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka y Tanzania. Se centra en tres objetivos: rastro de contactos de nuevos pacientes diagnosticados de lepra, cribaje de contactos y administración de SDR a los contactos seleccionados. Las adaptaciones de protocolos países-específicos se refieren a la definición de contacto, edad mínima para SDR y personal implicado. La calidad de la evidencia se mantiene mediante coordinación central, documentación detallada y supervisión. Ya se han completado alrededor de 2 años de trabajo de campo en siete países en julio de 2017. Los 5,941 pacientes índice registrados (89·4% de los registrados) han identificado un total de 123,311 contactos, de los cuales el 99·1% ha sido rastreado y cribado. De entre ellos, se identificaron 406 nuevos pacientes de lepra (329/100,000) y a 10,883 (8·9%) no se les administró SDR por diversos motivos. También 785 contactos (6·7%) rehusó tomar la profilaxis con SDR. En total, se administró SDR al 89·0% de los contactos registrados. La profilaxis post-exposición con SDR es segura; se puede integrar en los programas rutinarios de control de la lepra y es generalmente bien aceptada por el paciente índice, sus contactos y el personal sanitario. El programa también consigue estimular los programas locales de control de la lepra

Innovative approaches are required to further enhance leprosy control, reduce the number of people developing leprosy, and curb transmission. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis currently is the most promising approach to achieve this goal. The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme generates evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and single-dose rifampicin (SDR) administration into routine leprosy control activities in different settings. The LPEP programme is implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Focus is on three key interventions: tracing the contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients; screening the contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Country-specific protocol adaptations refer to contact definition, minimal age for SDR, and staff involved. Central coordination, detailed documentation and rigorous supervision ensure quality evidence. Around 2 years of field work had been completed in seven countries by July 2017. The 5,941 enrolled index patients (89·4% of the registered) identified a total of 123,311 contacts, of which 99·1% were traced and screened. Among them, 406 new leprosy patients were identified (329/100,000), and 10,883 (8·9%) were excluded from SDR for various reasons. Also, 785 contacts (0·7%) refused the prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 89·0% of the listed contacts. Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into the routines of different leprosy control programmes; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts and the health workforce. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme: update and interim analysis.

Innovative approaches are required to further enhance leprosy control, reduce the number of people developing leprosy, and curb transmission. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis currently is the most promising approach to achieve this goal. The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme generates evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and single-dose rifampicin (SDR) administration into routine leprosy control activities in different settings. The LPEP programme is implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Focus is on three key interventions: tracing the contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients; screening the contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Country-specific protocol adaptations refer to contact definition, minimal age for SDR, and staff involved. Central coordination, detailed documentation and rigorous supervision ensure quality evidence. Around 2 years of field work had been completed in seven countries by July 2017. The 5,941 enrolled index patients (89·4% of the registered) identified a total of 123,311 contacts, of which 99·1% were traced and screened. Among them, 406 new leprosy patients were identified (329/100,000), and 10,883 (8·9%) were excluded from SDR for various reasons. Also, 785 contacts (0·7%) refused the prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 89·0% of the listed contacts. Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into the routines of different leprosy control programmes; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts and the health workforce. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control.

APOPO's tuberculosis research agenda: achievements, challenges and prospects.

This article describes Anti-Persoonsmijnen Ontmijnende Product Ontwikkeling (APOPO) recent use of specially trained African giant pouched rats as detectors of pulmonary tuberculosis in people living in Tanzania. It summarizes the achievements and challenges encountered over the years and outlines future prospects. Since 2008, second-line screening by the rats has identified more than 2000 tuberculosis-positive patients who were missed by microscopy at Direct Observation of Treatment--Short Course centres in Tanzania. Moreover, data that are reviewed herein have been collected with respect to the rats' sensitivity and specificity in detecting tuberculosis. Findings strongly suggest that scent-detecting rats offer a quick and practical tool for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis and within the year APOPO's tuberculosis-detection project will be extended to Mozambique. As part of its local capacity building effort, APOPO hires and trains Tanzanians to play many important roles in its TB detection project and provides research and training opportunities for Tanzanian students.

APOPO's Tuberculosis Research Agenda: Achievements; Challenges and Prospects

Abstract:This article describes Anti-Persoonsmijnen Ontmijnende Product Ontwikkeling (APOPO) recent use of specially trained African giant pouched rats as detectors of pulmonary tuberculosis in people living in Tanzania. It summarizes the achievements and challenges encountered over the years and outlines future prospects. Since 2008; second-line screening by the rats has identified more than 2000 tuberculosis-positive patients who were missed by microscopy at Direct Observation of Treatment - Short Course centres in Tanzania. Moreover; data that are reviewed herein have been collected with respect to the rats' sensitivity and specificity in detecting tuberculosis. Findings strongly suggest that scent-detecting rats offer a quick and practical tool for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis and within the year APOPO's tuberculosis-detection project will be extended to Mozambique. As part of its local capacity building effort; APOPO hires and trains Tanzanians to play many important roles in its TB detection project and provides research and training opportunities for Tanzanian students