SETTING: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. OBJECTIVES: To determine treatment outcome among patients treated by private lung specialists in a public-private mix (PPM) project for improved TB control. METHODS: Cohorts of patients treated by private lung specialists within the PPM project and in National Tuberculosis Programme (NTP) facilities were followed for up to 12 months. The quality of case management and treatment outcome was determined based on information in treatment cards. As a complement, questionnaire surveys of private providers (PPs) and patients and focus group discussions with PPs were conducted. RESULTS: Among 400 patients treated by PPs, 36 different treatment regimens were used. Directly observed treatment was not used at all, and treatment evaluation with sputum smear microscopy and health education was inadequate. Overall treatment success was 60% and the default rate was 37%, which was considerably worse than in NTP facilities. CONCLUSION: This PPM project, which used a combination of training, supervision, standardised referral and information system and financial incentives, did not achieve sufficiently good treatment outcome by PPs. Possible reasons for the poor outcome include absence of subsidisation of drug costs and lack of regulatory enforcement.
SETTING: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. OBJECTIVES: To determine treatment outcome among patients treated by private lung specialists in a public-private mix (PPM) project for improved TB control. METHODS: Cohorts of patients treated by private lung specialists within the PPM project and in National Tuberculosis Programme (NTP) facilities were followed for up to 12 months. The quality of case management and treatment outcome was determined based on information in treatment cards. As a complement, questionnaire surveys of private providers (PPs) and patients and focus group discussions with PPs were conducted. RESULTS: Among 400 patients treated by PPs, 36 different treatment regimens were used. Directly observed treatment was not used at all, and treatment evaluation with sputum smear microscopy and health education was inadequate. Overall treatment success was 60% and the default rate was 37%, which was considerably worse than in NTP facilities. CONCLUSION: This PPM project, which used a combination of training, supervision, standardised referral and information system and financial incentives, did not achieve sufficiently good treatment outcome by PPs. Possible reasons for the poor outcome include absence of subsidisation of drug costs and lack of regulatory enforcement.
Authors: Ari Probandari; Lars Lindholm; Hans Stenlund; Adi Utarini; Anna-Karin Hurtig Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-05-07 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Lan Huu Nguyen; Phuong Thi Minh Tran; Thu Anh Dam; Rachel Jeanette Forse; Andrew James Codlin; Huy Ba Huynh; Thuy Thi Thu Dong; Giang Hoai Nguyen; Vinh Van Truong; Ha Thi Minh Dang; Tuan Dinh Nguyen; Hoa Binh Nguyen; Nhung Viet Nguyen; Amera Khan; Jacob Creswell; Luan Nguyen Quang Vo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: William A Wells; Colin Fan Ge; Nitin Patel; Teresa Oh; Elizabeth Gardiner; Michael E Kimerling Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-05-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: I Wayan Gede Artawan Eka Putra; Ni Wayan Arya Utami; I Ketut Suarjana; I Made Kerta Duana; Cok Istri Darma Astiti; I W Putra; Ari Probandari; Edine W Tiemersma; Chatarina Umbul Wahyuni Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 2.655