Protocol for the Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis in Nepal (ASCOT) pilot trial.

The World Health Organization's End TB (tuberculosis) Strategy advocates social and economic support for TB-affected households but evidence from low-income settings is scarce. We will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a locally-appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal. We will conduct a pilot randomised-controlled trial with mixed-methods process evaluation in four TB-endemic, impoverished districts of Nepal: Pyuthan, Chitwan, Mahottari, and Morang. We will recruit 128 people with TB notified to the Nepal National TB Program (NTP) and 40 multisectoral stakeholders including NTP staff, civil-society members, policy-makers, and ASCOT (Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis) team members. People with TB will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to four study arms (n=32 each): control; social support; economic support; and combined social and economic (socioeconomic) support. Social support will be TB education and peer-led mutual-support TB Clubs providing TB education and stigma-reduction counselling. Economic support will be monthly unconditional cash transfers during TB treatment with expectations (not conditions) of meeting NTP goals. At 0, 2, and 6 months following TB treatment initiation, participants will be asked to complete a survey detailing the social determinants and consequences of TB and their feedback on ASCOT. Complementary process evaluation will use focus group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII), and a workshop with multi-sectoral stakeholders to consider the challenges to ASCOT's implementation and scale-up. A sample of ~100 people with TB is recommended to estimate TB-related costs. Information power is estimated to be reached with approximately 25 FGD and 15 KII participants.  The ASCOT pilot trial will both generate robust evidence on a locally-appropriate, socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal and inform a large-scale future ASCOT trial, which will evaluate the intervention's impact on catastrophic costs mitigation and TB outcomes. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN ( ISRCTN17025974). [Abstract copyright: Copyright: © 2022 Rai B et al.

Comparing cross-sectional and longitudinal approaches to Tuberculosis Patient Cost Surveys using Nepalese data.

The World Health Organization has supported the development of national tuberculosis (TB) patient cost surveys to quantify the socio-economic impact of TB in high-burden countries. However, methodological differences in study design (e.g. cross-sectional vs longitudinal) can generate different estimates making the design and impact evaluation of socioeconomic protection strategies difficult. The objective of the study was to compare the socio-economic impacts of TB estimated by applying cross-sectional or longitudinal data collections in Nepal. We analysed data from a longitudinal costing survey (patients interviewed at three-time points) conducted between April 2018 and October 2019. We calculated both mean and median costs from patients interviewed during the intensive (cross-sectional 1) and continuation phases of treatment (cross-sectional 2). We then compared costs, the prevalence of catastrophic costs and the socio-economic impact of TB generated by each approach. There were significant differences in the costs and social impacts calculated by each approach. The median total cost (intensive plus continuation phases) was significantly higher for the longitudinal compared to cross-sectional 2 (US$119.42 vs 91.63, P < 0.001). The prevalence of food insecurity, social exclusion and patients feeling poorer or much poorer were all significantly higher applying a longitudinal approach. In conclusion, the longitudinal design captured important aspects of costs and socioeconomic impacts which were missed by applying a cross-sectional approach. If a cross-sectional approach is applied due to resource constraints, our data suggest the start of the continuation phase is the optimal timing for a single interview. Further research to optimize methodologies to report patient incurred expenditure during TB diagnosis and treatment is needed

Comparing cross-sectional and longitudinal approaches to Tuberculosis Patient Cost Surveys using Nepalese data : Tuberculosis cost survey approaches

The World Health Organization has supported the development of national tuberculosis (TB) patient cost surveys to quantify the socio-economic impact of TB in high-burden countries. However, methodological differences in study design (e.g. cross-sectional vs longitudinal) can generate different estimates making the design and impact evaluation of socioeconomic protection strategies difficult. The objective of the study was to compare the socioeconomic impacts of TB estimated by applying cross-sectional or longitudinal data collections in Nepal. We analysed data from a longitudinal costing survey (patients interviewed at three-time points) conducted between April 2018 and October 2019. We calculated both mean and median costs from patients interviewed during the intensive (cross-sectional 1) and continuation phases of treatment (cross-sectional 2). We then compared costs, the prevalence of catastrophic costs and the socio-economic impact of TB generated by each approach. There were significant differences in the costs and social impacts calculated by each approach. The median total cost (intensive plus continuation phases) was significantly higher for the longitudinal compared to cross-sectional 2 (US$119.42 vs 91.63,

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97\ub71 (95% UI 95\ub78-98\ub71) in Iceland, followed by 96\ub76 (94\ub79-97\ub79) in Norway and 96\ub71 (94\ub75-97\ub73) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18\ub76 (13\ub71-24\ub74) in the Central African Republic, 19\ub70 (14\ub73-23\ub77) in Somalia, and 23\ub74 (20\ub72-26\ub78) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91\ub75 (89\ub71-93\ub76) in Beijing to 48\ub70 (43\ub74-53\ub72) in Tibet (a 43\ub75-point difference), while India saw a 30\ub78-point disparity, from 64\ub78 (59\ub76-68\ub78) in Goa to 34\ub70 (30\ub73-38\ub71) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4\ub78-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20\ub79-point to 17\ub70-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17\ub72-point to 20\ub74-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view-and subsequent provision-of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8-98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9-97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5-97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1-24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3-23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2-26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91·5 (89·1-93·6) in Beijing to 48·0 (43·4-53·2) in Tibet (a 43·5-point difference), while India saw a 30·8-point disparity, from 64·8 (59·6-68·8) in Goa to 34·0 (30·3-38·1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4·8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20·9-point to 17·0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17·2-point to 20·4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view - and subsequent provision - of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016.

BACKGROUND: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. METHODS: Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita

Prevalence and correlates of postabortion long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among young women (24 and below) in Nepal: Strategy in the search for improvements

Abstract Introduction Postabortion contraceptive use differs across countries, suggesting the need for country-level research to identify barriers and suggest appropriate interventions. This study aimed to identify the prevalence and correlates of postabortion long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among women aged 24 or younger in Nepal. Methods This is a cohort study using Health Management Information System (HMIS) data where individual case records of women seeking induced abortion or postabortion care were documented using structured HMIS 3.7 records. Analysis was performed on the individual case records of 20,307 women 24 years or younger who received induced abortion or postabortion care services in the three-year period from July 2014 to June 2017 at 433 public and private health facilities. Findings Overall, LARC uptake during the study period was 11% (IUD: 3% and implant: 8%). The odds of LARC acceptance was higher for young women (24 and below) who belonged to Brahmin/Chhetri (AOR = 1.23; 95% CI: 1.02–1.47) and Janajatis (AOR = 1.20; 95% CI: 1.01–1.43) as compared to Dalits; young women who had an induced abortion (AOR = 3.75; 95% CI: 1.75–8.06) compared with postabortion care; and those receiving service from public sector health facilities (AOR = 4.00; 95% CI: 2.06–7.75) compared with private sector health facilities. Conclusion The findings from this study indicate the need to focus on barriers to acceptance of LARC among several groups of young women (24 and below) receiving abortion care in Nepal: Dalits, Madhesis and Muslims; nulliparous women; and those receiving services at private sector health facilities

Protocol for the Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis in Nepal (ASCOT) pilot trial

BACKGROUND:  The World Health Organization’s End TB (tuberculosis) Strategy advocates social and economic support for TB-affected households but evidence from low-income settings is scarce. We will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a locally-appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal. METHODS:  We will conduct a pilot randomised-controlled trial with mixed-methods process evaluation in four TB-endemic, impoverished districts of Nepal: Pyuthan, Chitwan, Mahottari, and Morang. We will recruit 128 people with TB notified to the Nepal National TB Program (NTP) and 40 multisectoral stakeholders including NTP staff, civil-society members, policy-makers, and ASCOT (Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis) team members. People with TB will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to four study arms (n=32 each): control; social support; economic support; and combined social and economic (socioeconomic) support. Social support will be TB education and peer-led mutual-support TB Clubs providing TB education and stigma-reduction counselling. Economic support will be monthly unconditional cash transfers during TB treatment with expectations (not conditions) of meeting NTP goals. At 0, 2, and 6 months following TB treatment initiation, participants will be asked to complete a survey detailing the social determinants and consequences of TB and their feedback on ASCOT. Complementary process evaluation will use focus group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII), and a workshop with multi-sectoral stakeholders to consider the challenges to ASCOT’s implementation and scale-up. A sample of ~100 people with TB is recommended to estimate TB-related costs. Information power is estimated to be reached with approximately 25 FGD and 15 KII participants. CONCLUSIONS:  The ASCOT pilot trial will both generate robust evidence on a locally-appropriate, socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal and inform a large-scale future ASCOT trial, which will evaluate the intervention’s impact on catastrophic costs mitigation and TB outcomes. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN ( ISRCTN17025974 )

Protocol for the Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis in Nepal (ASCOT) pilot trial [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization’s End TB (tuberculosis) Strategy advocates social and economic support for TB-affected households but evidence from low-income settings is scarce. We will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a locally-appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal. METHODS: We will conduct a pilot randomised-controlled trial with mixed-methods process evaluation in four TB-endemic, impoverished districts of Nepal: Pyuthan, Chitwan, Mahottari, and Morang. We will recruit 128 people with TB notified to the Nepal National TB Program (NTP) and 40 multisectoral stakeholders including NTP staff, civil-society members, policy-makers, and ASCOT (Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis) team members. People with TB will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to four study arms (n=32 each): control; social support; economic support; and combined social and economic (socioeconomic) support. Social support will be TB education and peer-led mutual-support TB Clubs providing TB education and stigma-reduction counselling. Economic support will be monthly unconditional cash transfers during TB treatment with expectations (not conditions) of meeting NTP goals. At 0, 2, and 6 months following TB treatment initiation, participants will be asked to complete a survey detailing the social determinants and consequences of TB and their feedback on ASCOT. Complementary process evaluation will use focus group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII), and a workshop with multi-sectoral stakeholders to consider the challenges to ASCOT’s implementation and scale-up. A sample of ~100 people with TB is recommended to estimate TB-related costs. Information power is estimated to be reached with approximately 25 FGD and 15 KII participants. CONCLUSIONS: The ASCOT pilot trial will both generate robust evidence on a locally-appropriate, socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal and inform a large-scale future ASCOT trial, which will evaluate the intervention’s impact on catastrophic costs mitigation and TB outcomes. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN (ISRCTN17025974)

Protocol for the Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis in Nepal (ASCOT) pilot trial

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization’s End TB (tuberculosis) Strategy advocates social and economic support for TB-affected households but evidence from low-income settings is scarce. We will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a locally-appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal. METHODS: We will conduct a pilot randomised-controlled trial with mixed-methods process evaluation in four TB-endemic, impoverished districts of Nepal: Pyuthan, Chitwan, Mahottari, and Morang. We will recruit 128 people with TB notified to the Nepal National TB Program (NTP) and 40 multisectoral stakeholders including NTP staff, civil-society members, policy-makers, and ASCOT (Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis) team members. People with TB will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to four study arms (n=32 each): control; social support; economic support; and combined social and economic (socioeconomic) support. Social support will be TB education and peer-led mutual-support TB Clubs providing TB education and stigma-reduction counselling. Economic support will be monthly unconditional cash transfers during TB treatment with expectations (not conditions) of meeting NTP goals. At 0, 2, and 6 months following TB treatment initiation, participants will be asked to complete a survey detailing the social determinants and consequences of TB and their feedback on ASCOT. Complementary process evaluation will use focus group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII), and a workshop with multi-sectoral stakeholders to consider the challenges to ASCOT’s implementation and scale-up. A sample of ~100 people with TB is recommended to estimate TB-related costs. Information power is estimated to be reached with approximately 25 FGD and 15 KII participants. CONCLUSIONS: The ASCOT pilot trial will both generate robust evidence on a locally-appropriate, socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal and inform a large-scale future ASCOT trial, which will evaluate the intervention’s impact on catastrophic costs mitigation and TB outcomes. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN (ISRCTN17025974).</ns3:p