BackgroundThe Government of India, made TB notification by private healthcare providers mandatory from May 2012 onwards. The National TB Programme developed a case based web based online reporting mechanism called NIKSHAY. However, the notification by private providers has been very low. We conducted the present study to determine the awareness, practice and anticipated enablers related to TB notification among private practitioners in Mysore city during 2014.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among private practitioners of Mysore city in south India. The private practitioners in the city were identified and 258 representative practitioners using probability proportional to size were interviewed using semi-structured questionnaire.ResultsAmong the 258 study participants, only 155 (60%) respondents agreed to a detailed interview. Among those interviewed, 141 (91%) were aware that TB is a notifiable disease; however 127 (82%) of them were not aware of process of notification and NIKSHAY. Only one in six practitioners was registered in NIKSHAY, while one in three practitioners are notifying without registration. The practitioners expected certain enablers from the programme like free drugs, training to notify in NIKSHAY and timely feedback. 74 (47%) opined that notification should be backed by legal punitive measures.ConclusionThe programme should develop innovative strategies that provide enablers, address concerns of practitioners while having simple mechanisms for TB notification. The programme should strengthen its inherent capacity to monitor TB notification.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1943-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundOne-fifth of the patients on multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment at the Drug-Resistant-TB (DR-TB) Site in Gujarat are lost-to-follow-up(LFU).ObjectiveTo understand patients’ and providers' perspectives on reasons for LFU and their suggestions to improve retention-in-care.DesignQualitative study conducted between December 2013-March 2014, including in-depth interviews with LFU patients and DOT-providers, and a focus group discussion with DR-TB site supervisors. A thematic-network analysis approach was utilised.ResultsThree sub-themes emerged: (i) Struggle with prolonged treatment; (ii) Strive against stigma and toward support; (iii) Divergent perceptions and practices. Daily injections, pill burden, DOT, migratory work, social problems, prior TB treatment, and adverse drugs effects were reported as major barriers to treatment adherence and retention-in-care by patients and providers. Some providers felt that despite their best efforts, LFU patients remain. Patient movements between private practitioners and traditional healers further influenced LFU.ConclusionThe study points to a need for repeated patient counselling and education, improved co-ordination between various tiers of providers engaged in DR-TB care, collaboration between the public, private and traditional practitioners, and promotion of social and economic support to help patients adhere to MDR-TB treatment and avoid LFU.

Background: There is limited evidence on whether active case finding (ACF) among marginalised and vulnerable populations mitigates the financial burden during tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis. Objectives: To determine the effect of ACF among marginalised and vulnerable populations on prevalence and inequity of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis among TB-affected households when compared with passive case finding (PCF). Methods: In 18 randomly sampled ACF districts in India, during March 2016 to February 2017, we enrolled all new sputum-smear-positive TB patients detected through ACF and an equal number of randomly selected patients detected through PCF. Direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs due to TB diagnosis were collected through patient interviews at their residence. We defined costs due to TB diagnosis as ‘catastrophic’ if the total costs (direct and indirect) due to TB diagnosis exceeded 20% of annual pre-TB household income. We used concentration curves and indices to assess the extent of inequity. Results: When compared with patients detected through PCF (n = 231), ACF patients (n = 234) incurred lower median total costs (US$ 4.6 and 20.4, p < 0.001). The prevalence of catastrophic costs in ACF and PCF was 10.3 and 11.5% respectively. Adjusted analysis showed that patients detected through ACF had a 32% lower prevalence of catastrophic costs relative to PCF [adjusted prevalence ratio (95% CI): 0.68 (0.69, 0.97)]. The concentration indices (95% CI) for total costs in both ACF [−0.15 (−0.32, 0.11)] and PCF [−0.06 (−0.20, 0.08)] were not significantly different from the line of equality and each other. The concentration indices (95% CI) for catastrophic costs in both ACF [−0.60 (−0.81, –0.39)] and PCF [−0.58 (−0.78, –0.38)] were not significantly different from each other: however, both the curves had a significant distribution among the poorest quintiles. Conclusion: ACF among marginalised and vulnerable populations reduced total costs and prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB diagnosis, but could not address inequity.

BackgroundDespite being a recognized standard of tuberculosis (TB) care internationally, mandatory TB case notification brings forth challenges from the private sector. Only three TB cases were notified in 2013 by private practitioners compared to 2000 TB cases notified yearly from the public sector in Alappuzha district. The study objective was to explore the knowledge, opinion and barriers regarding TB Notification among private practitioners offering TB services in Alappuzha, Kerala state, India.Methods & FindingsThis was a mixed-methods study with quantitative (survey) and qualitative components conducted between December 2013 and July 2014. The survey, using a structured questionnaire, among 169 private practitioners revealed that 88% were aware of mandatory notification. All patient-related details requested in the notification form (except government-issued identification number) were perceived to be important and easy to provide by more than 80% of practitioners. While more than 95% felt that notification should be mandatory, punitive action in case of failure to notify was considered unnecessary by almost two third. General practitioners (98%) were more likely to be aware of notification than specialists (84 %). (P<0.01). Qualitative purposive personal interviews (n=34) were carried out among private practitioners and public health providers. On thematic framework analysis of the responses, barriers to TB notification were grouped into three themes: ‘private provider misconceptions about notification’, ‘patient confidentiality, and stigma and discrimination ’and ‘lack of cohesion and coordination between public and private sector’. Private practitioners did not consider it necessary to notify TB cases treated with daily regimen.ConclusionCommunication strategies like training, timely dissemination of information of policy changes and one-to-one dialogue with private practitioners to dispel misconceptions may enhance TB notification. Trust building strategies like providing feedback about referred cases from private sector, health personnel visit or a liaison private doctor may ensure compliance to public health activities.

BackgroundAxshya SAMVAD is an active tuberculosis (TB) case finding (ACF) strategy under project Axshya (Axshya meaning ‘free of TB’ and SAMVAD meaning ‘conversation’) among marginalized and vulnerable populations in 285 districts of India.ObjectivesTo compare patient characteristics, health seeking, delays in diagnosis and treatment initiation among new sputum smear positive TB patients detected through ACF and passive case finding (PCF) under the national TB programme in marginalized and vulnerable populations between March 2016 and February 2017.MethodsThis observational analytic study was conducted in 18 randomly sampled Axshya districts. We enrolled all TB patients detected through ACF and an equal number of randomly selected patients detected through PCF in the same settings. Data on patient characteristics, health seeking and delays were collected through record review and patient interviews (at their residence). Delays included patient level delay (from eligibility for sputum examination to first contact with any health care provider (HCP)), health system level diagnosis delay (from contact with first HCP to TB diagnosis) and treatment initiation delays (from diagnosis to treatment initiation). Total delay was the sum of patient level, health system level diagnosis delay and treatment initiation delays.ResultsWe included 234 ACF-diagnosed and 231 PCF-diagnosed patients. When compared to PCF, ACF patients were relatively older (≥65 years, 14% versus 8%, p = 0.041), had no formal education (57% versus 36%, p<0.001), had lower monthly income per capita (median 13.1 versus 15.7 USD, p = 0.014), were more likely from rural areas (92% versus 81%, p<0.002) and residing far away from the sputum microscopy centres (more than 15 km, 24% versus 18%, p = 0.126). Fewer patients had history of significant loss of weight (68% versus 78%, p = 0.011) and sputum grade of 3+ (15% versus 21%, p = 0.060). Compared to PCF, HCP visits among ACF patients was significantly lower (median one versus two HCPs, p<0.001). ACF patients had significantly lower health system level diagnosis delay (median five versus 19 days, p = 0.008) and the association remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders. Patient level and total delays were not significantly different.ConclusionAxshya SAMVAD linked the most impoverished communities to TB care and resulted in reduction of health system level diagnosis delay.