Abstract
Background: In Denmark, reporting of tuberculosis (TB) treatment outcome is voluntary and data incomplete. In the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control most recent report presenting data from 2017, only 53.9% of Danish pulmonary TB cases had a reported outcome. Monitoring of TB treatment outcome is not feasible based on such limited results. In this retrospective study from 2009 to 2014, we present complete treatment outcome data and describe characteristics of cases lost to follow up. Methods: All cases notified from 2009 through 2014 were reviewed. Hospital records were examined, and TB treatment outcome was categorized according to the World Health Organization's (WHO) definitions. Results: A total of 2131 TB cases were included. Treatment outcome was reported to the Surveillance Unit in 1803 (84.6%) cases, of which 468 (26.0%) were reclassified. For pulmonary TB, 339 (28.9%) cases were reclassified between cured and treatment completed. Overall, the proportion of cases who achieved successful treatment outcome increased from 1488 (70.4%) to 1748 (81.8%). Conclusion: A high number of cases were reclassified during the review process. Increased focus on correct treatment outcome reporting is necessary in Denmark. A more comprehensive and exhaustive categorization of TB treatment outcome could be beneficial, especially for cases where collection of sputum or tissue towards the end of treatment is challenging.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 83 |
| Journal | BMC Health Services Research |
| Volume | 20 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| ISSN | 1472-6963 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 3. Feb 2020 |
Keywords
- Lost to follow-up
- Review of tuberculosis treatment outcome
- Surveillance
- Tuberculosis treatment outcome
- Lost to Follow-Up
- Humans
- Denmark
- Treatment Outcome
- Retrospective Studies
- Tuberculosis/therapy
- Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/therapy
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Review of tuberculosis treatment outcome reporting system in Denmark, a retrospective study cohort study from 2009 through 2014'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver