Community-friendly tool to assess patient satisfaction in tuberculosis programme in the covid pandemic period; Bhubaneswar; India.

National Tuberculosis Elimination Programme (NTEP) is a priority programme for India, given that India is one of the 20 countries with high burden of TB. Odisha (a state in Eastern India) in 2017 reported 159/lakh/year cases as against a national average incidence of 138.33/lakh/year. Thus, the state, under an encouraging political milieu went to vigorously implement the newer initiatives outlined in the National Strategic Plan 2020-25, the result of which in 2021 Odisha was ranked second in the country for its efforts on TB elimination. The current article attempts to take community feedback on the programmatic endeavours, by using a tool for client satisfaction. 350 consecutive subjects, adults aged 18 years and above consented among the 465 who were diagnosed and started on treatment between 5/4/21 to 5/4/22. The selected subjects were interviewed after confirmation of diagnosis at one DOTS centre in an urban city, using a pre-designed and pretested tool after taking requisite ethical permission from the institute as well as after consent from the participating subjects. The tool had 10 items on structure; 10 items on the process and 3 on outcome each rated on a Likert scale of 1-5 (very satisfied to very dissatisfied) and lastly a score on 10 scale for overall satisfaction. For all the 24 items; alpha Cronbach coefficient was 0.928 (bootstrap 95% CI); for subscales infrastructure, process and outcome isolatedly was 0.931, 0.912 and 0.959 respectively. This shows that the questionnaire had very good reliability. Infrastructure mean score for all 10 questions was above 4.5; for processes, it was <4.05 for a few questions and mainly these referred to Out of pocket expenditures and waiting time; outcome again for all three questions mean score was near or above 4.4. The overall score was between 5 and 10; maximally at 8. This simple tool gave clear-cut hints at the best picture scenario, as the study was done at a single DOTS service centre in the capital city of the state, which ran effectively even during the pandemic. However, it brings out the weak points in the processes like the cost incurred to come to the centre and communication with ancillary staff. No difference in satisfaction levels was reported among pulmonary and extrapulmonary cases (ratio 8.4:1.5) in this study in the covid period; with overall satisfaction being 4.45 ± 0.44 and 4.41 ± 0.25 respectively. The promptness in the programmatic services at the DOTS centre under study is encouraging but warrants conformity with DOTS centres in rural and far-to-reach areas. Best evaluation of achievements of programme can be determined by word of mouth of the beneficiaries. Hence, this tool if replicated at all service centres can help programme managers plug any disconnects in service delivery and assure good satisfaction from all quarters.