As well as imposing an economic burden on affected households, the high costs related to tuberculosis (TB) can create access and adherence barriers. This highlights the particular urgency of achieving one of the End TB Strategy’s targets: that no TB-affected households have to face catastrophic costs by 2020. In Indonesia, as elsewhere, there is also an emerging need to provide social protection by implementing universal health coverage (UHC). We therefore assessed the incidence of catastrophic total costs due to TB, and their determinants since the implementation of UHC. We interviewed adult TB and multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) patients in urban, suburban and rural areas of Indonesia who had been treated for at least one month or had finished treatment no more than one month earlier. Following the WHO recommendation, we assessed the incidence of catastrophic total costs due to TB. We also analyzed the sensitivity of incidence relative to several thresholds, and measured differences between poor and non-poor households in the incidence of catastrophic costs. Generalized linear mixed-model analysis was used to identify determinants of the catastrophic total costs. We analyzed 282 TB and 64 MDR-TB patients. For TB-related services, the median (interquartile range) of total costs incurred by households was 133 USD (55–576); for MDR-TB-related services, it was 2804 USD (1008–4325). The incidence of catastrophic total costs in all TB-affected households was 36% (43% in poor households and 25% in non-poor households). For MDR-TB-affected households, the incidence was 83% (83% and 83%). In TB-affected households, the determinants of catastrophic total costs were poor households (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7–7.8); being a breadwinner (aOR = 2.9, 95% CI: 1.3–6.6); job loss (aOR = 21.2; 95% CI: 8.3–53.9); and previous TB treatment (aOR = 2.9; 95% CI: 1.4–6.1). In MDR-TB-affected households, having an income-earning job before diagnosis was the only determinant of catastrophic total costs (aOR = 8.7; 95% CI: 1.8–41.7). Despite the implementation of UHC, TB-affected households still risk catastrophic total costs and further impoverishment. As well as ensuring access to healthcare, a cost-mitigation policy and additional financial protection should be provided to protect the poor and relieve income losses.

Background: The number of new leprosy cases is declining globally, but the disability caused by leprosy remains an important disease burden. The chance of disability is increased by delayed case detection. This review focusses on the individual and community determinants of delayed leprosy case detection. Methods: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis). The study protocol is registered in PROSPERO (code: CRD42020189274). To identify determinants of delayed detection, data was collected from five electronic databases: Embase.com, Medline All Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the WHO Global Health Library. Results: We included 27 papers from 4315 records assessed. They originated in twelve countries, had been published between January 1, 2000, and January 31, 2021, and described the factors related to delayed leprosy case detection, the duration of the delayed case, and the percentage of Grade 2 Disability (G2D). The median delay in detection ranged from 12 to 36 months, the mean delay ranged from 11.5 to 64.1 months, and the percentage of G2D ranged from 5.6 to 43.2%. Health-service-seeking behavior was the most common factor associated with delayed detection. The most common individual factors were older age, being male, having a lower disease-symptom perception, having multibacillary leprosy, and lack of knowledge. The most common socioeconomic factors were living in a rural area, performing agricultural labor, and being unemployed. Stigma was the most common social and community factor. Conclusions: Delayed leprosy case detection is clearly correlated with increased disability and should therefore be a priority of leprosy programs. Interventions should focus on determinants of delayed case detection such as health-service-seeking behavior, and should consider relevant individual, socioeconomic, and community factors, including stigmatization. Further study is required of the health service-related factors contributing to delay.

Background: Prevention of tuberculosis (TB)-related stigma is vital to achieving the World Health Organisation’s End TB Strategy target of eliminating TB. However, the process and impact evaluation of interventions to reduce TB-stigma are limited. This literature review aimed to examine the quality, design, implementation challenges, and successes of TB-stigma intervention studies and create a novel conceptual framework of pathways to TB-stigma reduction.Method: We searched relevant articles recorded in four scientific databases from 1999 to 2022, using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, supplemented by the snowball method and complementary grey literature searches. We assessed the quality of studies using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool, then reviewed study characteristics, data on stigma measurement tools used, and interventions implemented, and designed a conceptual framework to illustrate the pathways to TB-stigma reduction in the interventions identified.Results: Of 14,259 articles identified, eleven met inclusion criteria, of which three were high quality. TB-stigma reduction interventions consisted mainly of education and psychosocial support targeted predominantly toward three key populations: people with TB, healthcare workers, and the public. No psychosocial interventions for people with TB set TB-stigma reduction as their primary or co-primary aim. Eight studies on healthcare workers and the public reported a decrease in TB-stigma attributed to the interventions. Despite the benefits, the interventions were limited by a dearth of validated stigma measurement tools. Three of eight studies with quantitative stigma measurement questionnaires had not been previously validated among people with TB. No qualitative studies used previously validated methods or tools to qualitatively evaluate stigma. On the basis of these findings, we generated a conceptual framework that mapped the population targeted, interventions delivered, and their potential effects on reducing TB-stigma towards and experienced by people with TB and healthcare workers involved in TB care.Conclusions: Interpretation of the limited evidence on interventions to reduce TB-stigma is hampered by the heterogeneity of stigma measurement tools, intervention design, and outcome measures. Our novel conceptual framework will support mapping of the pathways to impacts of TB-stigma reduction interventions.Graphical

Background: Stigma experienced by people with infectious diseases impedes access to care, leading to adverse psychosocial consequences. Community-based interventions could prevent or mitigate these consequences but lack robust evidence. This scoping review aimed to identify and critically appraise community-based psychosocial support interventions to reduce stigma and improve mental health for people affected by stigmatizing infectious diseases including tuberculosis (TB), HIV/AIDS, and leprosy. Methods: This was a scoping review of literature indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, Elton B. Stephens Company (EBSCO) database, as well as reports in the World Health Organization repository, published from January 2000 to June 2023. We included research articles and reports addressing stigma and mental health disorders among individuals with TB, HIV/AIDS, or leprosy and/or their household members in low- and middle-income and/or high TB burden countries. We extracted information regarding types of psychosocial interventions and their reported impact on health and psychosocial indicators. Results: Thirty studies were included in this review: 21 (70%) related to HIV/AIDS, seven (23%) leprosy, and two (7%) TB. Of these, eleven were quantitative studies, nine qualitative, and ten mixed-methods. Eleven community-based interventions were reported to reduce infectious disease-related stigma, predominantly internalized and enacted stigma, and improve adherence to medication, quality of life, health-related knowledge, depression symptoms, and psychosocial wellbeing. Most studies involved lay people in the community as supporters of those affected. The predominant reported mechanism of intervention effect was the ability of supporters to enable those affected to feel seen and listened to, to accept their diagnosis, to improve their self-esteem, and to facilitate continuation of their daily lives, and thereby reducing anticipated stigma, self-stigma, and mental illness. Adequate training for lay people was reported to be essential to ensure success of interventions. Conclusions: This review identified a paucity of high-quality evidence relating to community-based interventions to reduce stigma for infectious diseases. However, such interventions have been reported to reduce stigma and improve mental health among people with HIV/AIDS, leprosy, and TB. Engaging affected communities and peers, through the conception, planning, training, implementation, and evaluation phases, was reported to be essential to optimise intervention uptake, impact, and sustainability.

The World Health Organization’s End Tuberculosis Strategy states that no tuberculosis (TB)-affected households should endure catastrophic costs due to TB. To achieve this target, it is essential to provide adequate social protection. As only a few studies in many countries have evaluated social-protection programs to determine whether the target is being reached, we assessed the effect of financial support on reducing the incidence of catastrophic costs due to TB in Indonesia. From July to September 2016, we interviewed adult patients receiving treatment for TB in 19 primary health centres in urban, sub-urban and rural area of Indonesia, and those receiving multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB treatment in an Indonesian national referral hospital. Based on the needs assessment, we developed eight scenarios for financial support. We assessed the effect of each simulated scenario by measuring reductions in the incidence of catastrophic costs. We analysed data of 282 TB and 64 MDR-TB patients. The incidences of catastrophic costs in affected households were 36 and 83%, respectively. Patients’ primary needs for social protection were financial support to cover costs related to income loss, transportation, and food supplements. The optimum scenario, in which financial support would be provided for these three items, would reduce the respective incidences of catastrophic costs in TB and MDR-TB-affected households to 11 and 23%. The patients experiencing catastrophic costs in this scenario would, however, have to pay high remaining costs (median of USD 910; [interquartile range (IQR) 662] in the TB group, and USD 2613; [IQR 3442] in the MDR-TB group). Indonesia’s current level of social protection is not sufficient to mitigate the socioeconomic impact of TB. Financial support for income loss, transportation costs, and food-supplement costs will substantially reduce the incidence of catastrophic costs, but financial support alone will not be sufficient to achieve the target of 0% TB-affected households facing catastrophic costs. This would require innovative social-protection policies and higher levels of domestic and external funding.