Delays in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis patients in Vietnam: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Treatment delay is an important indicator of access to tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment. Analyses of patient delay (i.e. time interval between onset of symptoms and first consultation of a health care provider) and health care delay (i.e. time interval between first consultation and start of treatment) can inform policies to improve access. This study assesses the patient, health care provider and total delay in diagnosis and treatment of new smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis patients, and the risk factors for long delay, in Vietnam.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional survey of new patients treated by the National Tuberculosis Control Programme was conducted in 70 randomly selected districts in Vietnam. All consecutively registered patients in one quarter of 2002 were interviewed using a pre-coded structured questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median (range) delay was 4 weeks (1–48) for total, 3 (1–48) weeks for patient and 1 (0–25) week for health care delay. Patients with long total delay (≥ 12 weeks, 15%) accounted for 49% of the cumulative number of delay-weeks. Independent risk factors (p < 0.05) for long total delay were female sex, middle age, remote setting, residence in the northern or central area, and initial visit to the private sector. For long patient delay (≥ 6 weeks) this was female sex, belonging to an ethnic minority, and living at > 5 km distance from a health facility or in the northern area. For long health care delay (≥ 6 weeks) this was urban setting, residence in the central area and initial visit to a communal health post, TB hospital or the private sector.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Analyses of patient and treatment delays can indicate target groups and areas for health education and strengthening of the referral system, in particular between the private sector and the NTP.</p

Causes of variation in BCG vaccine efficacy: examining evidence from the BCG REVAC cluster randomized trial to explore the masking and the blocking hypotheses.

BCG protection varies and in some places (nearest the equator) is low or absent. Understanding this variation can inform the efforts to develop new vaccines against tuberculosis. Two main hypotheses are used to explain this variation: under masking, new vaccines are unlikely to increase protection; under blocking new vaccines have a greater potential to be effective when BCG is not. We conducted a cluster randomized trial to explored the masking and blocking hypotheses by studying BCG vaccine efficacy of neonatal vaccination and when administered for the first or a second (revaccination) time at school age in two sites (Manaus close and Salvador further south from the equator). Seven hundred and sixty three state schools were matched on socio economic characteristics of the neighborhood and 239,934 children were randomized to vaccine (BCG vaccination at school age) or control group. Protection by first BCG vaccination at school age was high in Salvador (34%, 95% CI 7-53%, p=0.017) but low in Manaus (8%, 95% CI t0 39-40%, p=0.686). For revaccination at school age, protection was modest in Salvador (19%, 95% CI 3-33%, p=0.022) and absent in Manaus (1%, 95% CI to 27-23%, p=0.932). Vaccine efficacy for neonatal vaccination was similar in Salvador (40%, 95% CI 22-54%, p<0.001) and Manaus (36%, 95% CI 11-53%, p=0.008). Variation in BCG efficacy was marked when vaccine was given at school age but absent at birth, which points towards blocking as the dominant mechanism. New tuberculosis vaccines that overcome or by pass this blocking effect could confer protection in situations where BCG is not protective

Global plagues and the Global Fund: Challenges in the fight against HIV, TB and malaria

BACKGROUND: Although a grossly disproportionate burden of disease from HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria remains in the Global South, these infectious diseases have finally risen to the top of the international agenda in recent years. Ideal strategies for combating these diseases must balance the advantages and disadvantages of 'vertical' disease control programs and 'horizontal' capacity-building approaches. DISCUSSION: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) represents an important step forward in the struggle against these pathogens. While its goals are laudable, significant barriers persist. Most significant is the pitiful lack of funds committed by world governments, particularly those of the very G8 countries whose discussions gave rise to the Fund. A drastic scaling up of resources is the first clear requirement for the GFATM to live up to the international community's lofty intentions. A directly related issue is that of maintaining a strong commitment to the treatment of the three diseases along with traditional prevention approaches, with the ensuing debates over providing affordable access to medications in the face of the pharmaceutical industry's vigorous protection of patent rights. SUMMARY: At this early point in the Fund's history, it remains to be seen how these issues will be resolved at the programming level. Nevertheless, it is clear that significant structural changes are required in such domains as global spending priorities, debt relief, trade policy, and corporate responsibility. HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria are global problems borne of gross socioeconomic inequality, and their solutions require correspondingly geopolitical solutions

Public health triangulation: approach and application to synthesizing data to understand national and local HIV epidemics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Public health triangulation is a process for reviewing, synthesising and interpreting secondary data from multiple sources that bear on the same question to make public health decisions. It can be used to understand the dynamics of HIV transmission and to measure the impact of public health programs. While traditional intervention research and metaanalysis would be ideal sources of information for public health decision making, they are infrequently available, and often decisions can be based only on surveillance and survey data.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The process involves examination of a wide variety of data sources and both biological, behavioral and program data and seeks input from stakeholders to formulate meaningful public health questions. Finally and most importantly, it uses the results to inform public health decision-making. There are 12 discrete steps in the triangulation process, which included identification and assessment of key questions, identification of data sources, refining questions, gathering data and reports, assessing the quality of those data and reports, formulating hypotheses to explain trends in the data, corroborating or refining working hypotheses, drawing conclusions, communicating results and recommendations and taking public health action.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Triangulation can be limited by the quality of the original data, the potentials for ecological fallacy and "data dredging" and reproducibility of results.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Nonetheless, we believe that public health triangulation allows for the interpretation of data sets that cannot be analyzed using meta-analysis and can be a helpful adjunct to surveillance, to formal public health intervention research and to monitoring and evaluation, which in turn lead to improved national strategic planning and resource allocation.</p

An approach to addressing governance from a health system framework perspective

As countries strive to strengthen their health systems in resource constrained contexts, policy makers need to know how best to improve the performance of their health systems. To aid these decisions, health system stewards should have a good understanding of how health systems operate in order to govern them appropriately. While a number of frameworks for assessing governance in the health sector have been proposed, their application is often hindered by unrealistic indicators or they are overly complex resulting in limited empirical work on governance in health systems. This paper reviews contemporary health sector frameworks which have focused on defining and developing indicators to assess governance in the health sector. Based on these, we propose a simplified approach to look at governance within a common health system framework which encourages stewards to take a systematic perspective when assessing governance. Although systems thinking is not unique to health, examples of its application within health systems has been limited. We also provide an example of how this approach could be applied to illuminate areas of governance weaknesses which are potentially addressable by targeted interventions and policies. This approach is built largely on prior literature, but is original in that it is problem-driven and promotes an outward application taking into consideration the major health system building blocks at various levels in order to ensure a more complete assessment of a governance issue rather than a simple input-output approach. Based on an assessment of contemporary literature we propose a practical approach which we believe will facilitate a more comprehensive assessment of governance in health systems leading to the development of governance interventions to strengthen system performance and improve health as a basic human right