Video-observed therapy and medication adherence for tuberculosis patients: Randomised controlled trial in Moldova

47Citations
Citations of this article
204Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: The effectiveness of video-observed therapy (VOT) for treating tuberculosis (TB) has not been measured in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where >95% of TB cases and deaths occur. In this study, we analyse the effectiveness and patient cost-difference of VOT compared to clinic-based directly observed therapy (DOT) in improving medication adherence in Moldova, a LMIC in Eastern Europe. Methods: The study was a two-arm individually randomised trial with 197 TB patients (n=99 DOT control group; n=98 VOT treatment group; multidrug-resistant TB cases were excluded). The primary outcome was observed medication adherence, measured by the number of days that a patient failed to be observed adhering to medication for every 2-week period during the course of their treatment. Results: VOT significantly decreased nonadherence by 4 days (95% CI 3.35-4.67 days, p<0.01) per 2-week period: 5.24 days missed per 2-week period for DOT and 1.29 days for VOT. VOT patients spent MDL 504 (∼EUR 25) (95% CI MDL 277-730, p<0.01) and 58 h (95% CI 48-68 h, p<0.01) less on their treatment. In addition, VOT increased self-reported satisfaction with treatment. We found no significant results pertaining to treatment success, patient wellbeing or patient employment status and some evidence of an increase in side-effects. Discussion: In this trial, VOT increased observed medication adherence for TB patients in Moldova, a LMIC, when compared to clinic-based DOT. Additionally, VOT significantly reduced the time and money patients spent on their treatment.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ravenscroft, L., Kettle, S., Persian, R., Ruda, S., Severin, L., Doltu, S., … Loewenstein, G. (2020). Video-observed therapy and medication adherence for tuberculosis patients: Randomised controlled trial in Moldova. European Respiratory Journal, 56(2). https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00493-2020

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free