Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) End TB Strategy has established a milestone to reduce the number of tuberculosis (TB)- affected households facing catastrophic costs to zero by 2020. The role of active case finding (ACF) in reducing patient costs has not been determined globally. This study therefore aimed to compare costs incurred by TB patients diagnosed through ACF and passive case finding (PCF), and to determine the prevalence and intensity of patient-incurred catastrophic costs in Nepal.Methods: The study was conducted in two districts of Nepal: Bardiya and Pyuthan (Province No. 5) between June and August 2018. One hundred patients were included in this study in a 1:1 ratio (PCF: ACF, 25 consecutive ACF and 25 consecutive PCF patients in each district). The WHO TB patient costing tool was applied to collect information from patients or a member of their family regarding indirect and direct medical and non-medical costs. Catastrophic costs were calculated based on the proportion of patients with total costs exceeding 20% of their annual household income.The intensity of catastrophic costs was calculated using the positive overshoot method. The chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare proportions and costs. Meanwhile, the Mantel Haenszel test was performed to assess the association between catastrophic costs and type of diagnosis.Results: Ninety-nine patients were interviewed (50 ACF and 49 PCF). Patients diagnosed through ACF incurred lower costs during the pre-treatment period (direct medical: USD 14 vs USD 32,P = 0.001; direct non-medical: USD 3 vs USD 10,P = 0.004; indirect, time loss: USD 4 vs USD 13,P < 0.001). The cost of the pre-treatment and intensive phases combined was also lower for direct medical (USD 15 vs USD 34,P = 0.002) and non-medical (USD 30 vs USD 54,P = 0.022) costs among ACF patients. The prevalence of catastrophic direct costs was lower for ACF patients for all thresholds. A lower intensity of catastrophic costs was also documented for ACF patients, although the difference was not statistically significant.Conclusions: ACF can reduce patient-incurred costs substantially, contributing to the End TB Strategy target. Other synergistic policies, such as social protection, will also need to be implemented to reduce catastrophic costs to zero among TB-affected households.

Objective Psychosocial and economic (socioeconomic) barriers, including poverty, stigma and catastrophic costs, impede access to tuberculosis (TB) services in low-income countries. We aimed to characterise the socioeconomic barriers and facilitators of accessing TB services in Nepal to inform the design of a locally appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households. Design From August 2018 to July 2019, we conducted an exploratory qualitative study consisting of semistructured focus group discussions (FGDs) with purposively selected multisectoral stakeholders. The data were managed in NVivo V.12, coded by consensus and analysed thematically. Setting The study was conducted in four districts, Makwanpur, Chitwan, Dhanusha and Mahottari, which have a high prevalence of poverty and TB. Participants Seven FGDs were conducted with 54 in-country stakeholders, grouped by stakeholders, including people with TB (n=21), community stakeholders (n=13) and multidisciplinary TB healthcare professionals (n=20) from the National TB Programme. Results The perceived socioeconomic barriers to accessing TB services were: inadequate TB knowledge and advocacy; high food and transportation costs; income loss and stigma. The perceived facilitators to accessing TB care and services were: enhanced championing and awareness-raising about TB and TB services; social protection including health insurance; cash, vouchers and/or nutritional allowance to cover food and travel costs; and psychosocial support and counselling integrated with existing adherence counselling from the National TB Programme. Conclusion These results suggest that support interventions that integrate TB education, psychosocial counselling and expand on existing cash transfer schemes would be locally appropriate and could address the socioeconomic barriers to accessing and engaging with TB services faced by TB-affected households in Nepal. The findings have been used to inform the design of a socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households. The acceptability, feasibility and impact of this intervention on TB-related costs, stigma and TB treatment outcomes, is now being evaluated in a pilot implementation study in Nepal.

Tuberculosis (TB), the leading single infectious diseases killer globally, is driven by poverty. Conversely, having TB worsens impoverishment. During TB illness, lost income and out-of-pocket costs can become “catastrophic”, leading patients to abandon treatment, develop drug-resistance, and die. WHO’s 2015 End TB Strategy recommends eliminating catastrophic costs and providing socioeconomic support for TB-affected people. However, there is negligible evidence to guide the design and implementation of such socioeconomic support, especially in low-income, TB-endemic countries. A national, multi-sectoral workshop was held in Kathmandu, Nepal, on the 11th and 12th September 2019, to develop a shortlist of feasible, locally appropriate socioeconomic support interventions for TB-affected households in Nepal, a low-income country with significant TB burden. The workshop brought together key stakeholders in Nepal including from the Ministry of Health and Population, Department of Health Services, Provincial Health Directorate, Health Offices, National TB Program (NTP); and TB/Leprosy Officers, healthcare workers, community health volunteers, TB-affected people, and external development partners (EDP). During the workshop, participants reviewed current Nepal NTP data and strategy, discussed the preliminary results of a mixed-methods study of the socioeconomic determinants and consequences of TB in Nepal, described existing and potential socioeconomic interventions for TB-affected households in Nepal, and selected the most promising interventions for future randomized controlled trial evaluations in Nepal. This report describes the activities, outcomes, and recommendations from the workshop.

This study compared the yield of tuberculosis (TB) active case finding (ACF) interventions applied under TB REACH funding. Between June 2017 to November 2018, Birat Nepal Medical Trust identified presumptive cases using simple verbal screening from three interventions: door-to-door screening of social contacts of known index cases, TB camps in remote areas, and screening for hospital out-patient department (OPD) attendees. Symptomatic individuals were then tested using smear microscopy or GeneXpert MTB/RIF as first diagnostic test. Yield rates were compared for each intervention and diagnostic method. We evaluated additional cases notified from ACF interventions by comparing case notifications of the intervention and control districts using standard TB REACH methodology. The project identified 1092 TB cases. The highest yield was obtained from OPD screening at hospitals (n = 566/1092; 52%). The proportion of positive tests using GeneXpert (5.5%, n = 859/15,637) was significantly higher than from microscopy testing 2% (n = 120/6309). (OR = 1.4; 95%CI = 1.12–1.72; p = 0.0026). The project achieved 29% additionality in case notifications in the intervention districts demonstrating that GeneXpert achieved substantially higher case-finding yields. Therefore, to increase national case notification for TB, Nepal should integrate OPD screening using GeneXpert testing in every district hospital and scale up of community-based ACF of TB patient contacts nationally.

This study compares the yield and additionality of community-based active tuberculosis (TB) active case-finding strategies using either smear microscopy or GeneXpert as the TB diagnostic test. Active case-finding strategies screened social contacts of index cases and high-risk groups in four districts of Nepal in July 2017–2019. Two districts (Chitwan and Dhanusha) applied GeneXpert testing and two districts (Makwanpur and Mahotarri) used smear microscopy. Two control districts implemented standard national TB program activities. Districts implementing GeneXpert testing screened 23,657 people for TB, tested 17,114 and diagnosed 764 TB cases, producing a yield of 4.5%. Districts implementing smear microscopy screened 19,961 people for TB, tested 13,285 and diagnosed 437 cases, producing a yield of 3.3%. The screening numbers required were 31 for GeneXpert and 45.7 for smear districts. The test numbers required were 22.4 and 30.4 for GeneXpert and smear. Using the TB REACH additionality method, social contact tracing for TB through GeneXpert testing contributed to a 20% (3958/3322) increase in district-level TB notifications, smear microscopy 12.4% (3146/2798), and −0.5% (2553/2566) for control districts. Therefore, social contact tracing of TB index cases using GeneXpert testing should be implemented throughout Nepal within the TB FREE initiative to close the notification gap and accelerate progress toward END TB strategy targets.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization’s End TB (tuberculosis) Strategy advocates social and economic support for TB-affected households but evidence from low-income settings is scarce. We will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a locally-appropriate socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal. METHODS: We will conduct a pilot randomised-controlled trial with mixed-methods process evaluation in four TB-endemic, impoverished districts of Nepal: Pyuthan, Chitwan, Mahottari, and Morang. We will recruit 128 people with TB notified to the Nepal National TB Program (NTP) and 40 multisectoral stakeholders including NTP staff, civil-society members, policy-makers, and ASCOT (Addressing the Social Determinants and Consequences of Tuberculosis) team members. People with TB will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to four study arms (n=32 each): control; social support; economic support; and combined social and economic (socioeconomic) support. Social support will be TB education and peer-led mutual-support TB Clubs providing TB education and stigma-reduction counselling. Economic support will be monthly unconditional cash transfers during TB treatment with expectations (not conditions) of meeting NTP goals. At 0, 2, and 6 months following TB treatment initiation, participants will be asked to complete a survey detailing the social determinants and consequences of TB and their feedback on ASCOT. Complementary process evaluation will use focus group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII), and a workshop with multi-sectoral stakeholders to consider the challenges to ASCOT’s implementation and scale-up. A sample of ~100 people with TB is recommended to estimate TB-related costs. Information power is estimated to be reached with approximately 25 FGD and 15 KII participants. CONCLUSIONS: The ASCOT pilot trial will both generate robust evidence on a locally-appropriate, socioeconomic support intervention for TB-affected households in Nepal and inform a large-scale future ASCOT trial, which will evaluate the intervention’s impact on catastrophic costs mitigation and TB outcomes. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN (ISRCTN17025974).