Substitution of moxifloxacin for isoniazid resulted in a small but statistically nonsignificant increase in Week-8 culture negativity.

We sought to determine the risk of acquired rifamycin resistant (ARR) tuberculosis associated with rifampin- versus rifabutin-based directly observed therapy and to assess the risk factors for relapse of tuberculosis. This observational cohort study included patients with culture-confirmed rifamycin-susceptible tuberculosis reported to the Baltimore City Health Department (Baltimore, MD) during the period of January 1993 through December 2001. Of the 407 patients, 108 (27%) were human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) seropositive, 161 (40%) were HIV seronegative, and 138 (34%) had an unknown serostatus. Three (2.8%) of 108 HIV-seropositive persons had ARR tuberculosis, compared with 0 of 299 persons with negative or unknown HIV serostatus (P=.02). Among HIV-seropositive patients, 3 (3.7%) of 81 who were treated with rifampin and 0 of 27 who were treated with rifabutin had ARR tuberculosis (P=.57). Among HIV-seropositive patients, the only risk factor for recurrent tuberculosis was a low median initial CD4+ T lymphocyte count (51 vs. 138 cells/mm3; P=.02). The median CD4+ T lymphocyte count among patients with ARR tuberculosis was 51 cells/mm3. ARR tuberculosis can occur with rifampin-based regimens, but in this study, the risk was not significantly higher than that for a rifabutin-based regimen.

No abstract

MTD improved diagnostic accuracy and timeliness and reduced unnecessary respiratory isolation, treatment, and contact investigations. It was cost saving in patients with HIV, homelessness, or substance abuse, but not in others.

BACKGROUND: Video directly observed therapy (vDOT) was introduced to increase flexibility and meet patient-specific needs for TB treatment. This study aimed to assess the reach and effectiveness of vDOT for TB treatment under routine conditions in Alameda County, CA, USA, a busy, urban setting, from 2018 to 2020.METHODS: We prospectively evaluated routinely collected data to estimate 1) reach (proportion of patients initiated on vDOT vs. in-person DOT); and 2) effectiveness (proportion of prescribed doses with verified administration by vDOT vs. in-person DOT).RESULTS: Among 163 TB patients, 94 (58%) utilized vDOT during treatment, of whom 54 (57%) received exclusively vDOT. Individuals receiving vDOT were on average younger than those receiving in-person therapy (46 vs. 61 years; P < 0.001). The median time to vDOT initiation was 2.2 weeks (IQR 1.1–10.0); patients were monitored for a median of 27.0 weeks (IQR 24.6–31.9). vDOT led to higher proportions of verified prescribed doses than in-person DOT (68% vs. 54%; P < 0.001). Unobserved self-administration occurred for all patients on weekends based on clinic instructions, but a larger proportion of doses were self-administered during periods of in-person DOT than of vDOT (45% vs. 24%; P < 0.001).CONCLUSION: A TB program successfully maintained vDOT, reaching the majority of patients and achieving greater medication verification than in-person DOT.

Background In-person directly observed therapy (DOT) is commonly used for tuberculosis (TB) treatment monitoring in the US, with increasing usage of video-DOT (vDOT). We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on TB treatment adherence, and utilization and effectiveness of vDOT. Methods We abstracted routinely collected data on individuals treated for TB disease in Baltimore, Maryland between April 2019 and April 2021. Our primary outcomes were to assess vDOT utilization and treatment adherence, defined as the proportion of prescribed doses (7 days/week) verified by observation (in-person versus video-DOT), comparing individuals in the pre-COVID and COVID (April 2020) periods. Results Among 52 individuals with TB disease, 24 (46%) received treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. vDOT utilization significantly increased in the COVID period (18/24[75%]) compared to pre-COVID (12/28[43%], p = 0.02). Overall, median verified adherence was similar pre-COVID and COVID periods (65% versus 68%, respectively, p = 0.96). Adherence was significantly higher overall when using vDOT (median 86% [IQR 70–98%]) compared to DOT (median 59% [IQR 55-64%], p < 0.01); this improved adherence with vDOT was evident in both the pre-COVID (median 98% vs. 58%, p < 0.01) and COVID period (median 80% vs. 62%, p = 0.01). Conclusion vDOT utilization increased during the COVID period and was more effective than in-person DOT at verifying ingestion of prescribed treatment.

Background In-person directly observed therapy (DOT) is standard of care for tuberculosis (TB) treatment adherence monitoring in the US, with increasing use of video-DOT (vDOT). In Minneapolis, vDOT became available in 2019. Objective In this paper, we aimed to evaluate the use and effectiveness of vDOT in a program setting, including comparison of verified adherence among those receiving vDOT and in-person DOT. We also sought to understand the impact of COVID-19 on TB treatment adherence and technology adoption. Methods We abstracted routinely collected data on individuals receiving therapy for TB in Minneapolis, MN, between September 2019 and June 2021. Our primary outcomes were to assess vDOT use and treatment adherence, defined as the proportion of prescribed doses (7 days per week) verified by observation (in person versus video-DOT), and to compare individuals receiving therapy in the pre–COVID-19 (before March 2020), and post–COVID-19 (after March 2020) periods; within the post–COVID-19 period, we evaluated early COVID-19 (March-August 2020), and intra–COVID-19 (after August 2020) periods. Results Among 49 patients with TB (mean age 41, SD 19; n=27, 55% female and n=47, 96% non–US born), 18 (36.7%) received treatment during the post–COVID-19 period. Overall, verified adherence (proportion of observed doses) was significantly higher when using vDOT (mean 81%, SD 17.4) compared to in-person DOT (mean 54.5%, SD 10.9; P=.001). The adoption of vDOT increased significantly from 35% (11/31) of patients with TB in the pre–COVID-19 period to 67% (12/18) in the post–COVID-19 period (P=.04). Consequently, overall verified (ie, observed) adherence among all patients with TB in the clinic improved across the study periods (56%, 67%, and 79%, P=.001 for the pre–, early, and intra–COVID-19 periods, respectively). Conclusions vDOT use increased after the COVID-19 period, was more effective than in-person DOT at verifying ingestion of prescribed treatment, and led to overall increased verified adherence in the clinic despite the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

†"Do you think sudden confusion or trouble speaking are symptoms of stroke?" "Do you think sudden numbness or weakness of face, arm, or leg, especially on one side, are symptoms of stroke?" "Do you think sudden trouble seeing in one or both eyes is a symptom of stroke?" "Do you think sudden trouble walking, dizziness, or loss of balance are symptoms of stroke?" "Do you think a severe headache with no known cause is a symptom of stroke?"