Quality of active case-finding for tuberculosis in India: a national level secondary data analysis.

BACKGROUND: India has been implementing active case-finding (ACF) for TB among marginalised and vulnerable (high-risk) populations since 2017. The effectiveness of ACF cycle(s) is dependent on the use of appropriate screening and diagnostic tools and meeting quality indicators. OBJECTIVES: To determine the number of ACF cycles implemented in 2021 at national, state (n = 36) and district (n = 768) level and quality indicators for the first ACF cycle. METHODS: In this descriptive study, aggregate TB program data for each ACF activity that was extracted was further aggregated against each ACF cycle at the district level in 2021. One ACF cycle was the period identified to cover all the high-risk populations in the district. Three TB ACF quality indicators were calculated: percentage population screened (≥10%), percentage tested among screened (≥4.8%) and percentage diagnosed among tested (≥5%). We also calculated the number needed to screen (NNS) for diagnosing one person with TB (≤1538). RESULTS: Of 768 TB districts, ACF data for 111 were not available. Of the remaining 657 districts, 642 (98%) implemented one, and 15 implemented two to three ACF cycles. None of the districts or states met all three TB ACF quality indicators' cut-offs. At the national level, for the first ACF cycle, 9.3% of the population were screened, 1% of the screened were tested and 3.7% of the tested were diagnosed. The NNS was 2824: acceptable (≤1538) in institutional facilities and poor for population-based groups. Data were not consistently available to calculate the percentage of i) high-risk population covered, ii) presumptive TB among screened and iii) tested among presumptive. CONCLUSION: In 2021, India implemented one ACF cycle with sub-optimal ACF quality indicators. Reducing the losses between screening and testing, improving data quality and sensitising stakeholders regarding the importance of meeting all ACF quality indicators are recommended.

Effect of glycemic control and type of diabetes treatment on unsuccessful TB treatment outcomes among people with TB-Diabetes: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Stringent glycemic control by using insulin as a replacement or in addition to oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) has been recommended for people with tuberculosis and diabetes mellitus (TB-DM). This systematic review (PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016039101) analyses whether this improves TB treatment outcomes. OBJECTIVES: Among people with drug-susceptible TB and DM on anti-TB treatment, to determine the effect of i) glycemic control (stringent or less stringent) compared to poor glycemic control and ii) insulin (only or with OHAs) compared to 'OHAs only' on unsuccessful TB treatment outcome(s). We looked for unfavourable TB treatment outcomes at the end of intensive phase and/or end of TB treatment (minimum six months and maximum 12 months follow up). Secondary outcomes were development of MDR-TB during the course of treatment, recurrence after 6 months and/or after 1 year post successful treatment completion and development of adverse events related to glucose lowering treatment (including hypoglycemic episodes). METHODS: All interventional studies (with comparison arm) and cohort studies on people with TB-DM on anti-TB treatment reporting glycemic control, DM treatment details and TB treatment outcomes were eligible. We searched electronic databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar) and grey literature between 1996 and April 2017. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done independently by two investigators and recourse to a third investigator, for resolution of differences. RESULTS: After removal of duplicates from 2326 identified articles, 2054 underwent title and abstract screening. Following full text screening of 56 articles, nine cohort studies were included. Considering high methodological and clinical heterogeneity, we decided to report the results qualitatively and not perform a meta-analysis. Eight studies dealt with glycemic control, of which only two were free of the risk of bias (with confounder-adjusted measures of effect). An Indian study reported 30% fewer unsuccessful treatment outcomes (aOR (0.95 CI): 0.72 (0.64-0.81)) and 2.8 times higher odds of 'no recurrence' (aOR (0.95 CI): 2.83 (2.60-2.92)) among patients with optimal glycemic control at baseline. A Peruvian study reported faster culture conversion among those with glycemic control (aHR (0.95 CI): 2.2 (1.1,4)). Two poor quality studies reported the effect of insulin on TB treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: We identified few studies that were free of the risk of bias. There were limited data and inconsistent findings among available studies. We recommend robustly designed and analyzed studies including randomized controlled trials on the effect of glucose lowering treatment options on TB treatment outcomes.