Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34290301›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

The effect of empirical and laboratory-confirmed tuberculosis on treatment outcomes.

Osman Abdullahi, Ngari Moses, Deche Sanga, Willetts Annie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ultrasononography in Managing Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis: A Randomized, Controlled, Parallel, Superiority, Open-Label Trial.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Advances in TB testing.Advances in clinical chemistry · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Osman AbdullahiDepartment of Public Health, Pwani University, P.O Box 195, Kilifi, 80108, Kenya. o.abdullahi@pu.ac.ke.
Ngari MosesDepartment of Public Health, Pwani University, P.O Box 195, Kilifi, 80108, Kenya.
Deche SangaKilifi County TB Control Program, P.O Box 9-80108, Kilifi, Kilifi County, Kenya.
Willetts AnnieDepartment of Public Health, Pwani University, P.O Box 195, Kilifi, 80108, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for diagnosing and treating Tuberculosis (TB) includes clinical signs, therefore not requiring bacteriological laboratory confirmation. In resource-limited settings, including Kenya, this empirical TB treatment is routine practice however limited data exist on patient clinical outcomes when comparing the method of diagnosis. We evaluated TB treatment outcomes comparing clinically diagnosed and bacteriologically confirmed TB, 6 months after starting treatment of TB in a rural county in Kenya. Our analysis compared patients with a clinical versus a bacteriologically confirmed TB diagnosis. In this retrospective analysis, we included all adults (≥ 18 years) starting treatment of TB and followed up for 6 months, within the County TB surveillance database from 2012 to 2018. Patients included from both public and private facilities. The TB treatment outcomes assessed included treatment success, treatment failure, death, defaulted and transferred out. We used survival regression models to assess effect of type of diagnosis on TB treatment outcome defining time at risk from date of starting treatment to experiencing one of the treatment outcomes or completing 6-months of treatment. A total of 12,856 patients; median age 37 [IQR 28 - 50] years were included. 7639 (59%) were male while 11,339 (88%) were pulmonary TB cases. Overall, 11,633 (90%) were given first-line TB treatment and 3791 (29%) were HIV infected. 6472 (50%) of the patients were clinically diagnosed of whom 4521/6472 (70%) had a negative sputum/GeneXpert test. During the study 5565 person-years (PYs) observed, treatment success was 82% and 83% amongst clinically and bacteriologically diagnosed patients (P = 0.05). There were no significant differences in defaulting (P = 0.70) or transfer out (P = 0.19) between clinically and bacteriologically diagnosed patients. Mortality was significantly higher among clinically diagnosed patients: 639 (9.9%) deaths compared to 285 (4.5%) amongst the bacteriologically diagnosed patients; aHR 5.16 (95%CI 2.17 - 12.3) P < 0.001. Our study suggests survival during empirical TB treatment is significantly lower compared to patients with laboratory evidence, irrespective of HIV status and age. To improve TB treatment outcomes amongst clinically diagnosed patients, we recommend systematic screening for comorbidities, prompt diagnosis and management of other infections.

Indexed as

AdultClinical Laboratory TechniquesDiagnostic Screening ProgramsFemaleHumansKenyaMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRural PopulationTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID34290301
PMCPMC8295390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.