| Literature DB >> 19602255 |
Rajendra Basnet1, Sven Gudmund Hinderaker, Don Enarson, Pushpa Malla, Odd Mørkve.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying reasons for delay in diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis is important for the health system to find ways to treat patients as early as possible, and hence reduce the suffering of patients and transmission of the disease. The objectives of this study was to assess the duration of delay in the diagnosis of tuberculosis and to investigate its determinants.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19602255 PMCID: PMC2716339 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-236
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Characteristics of Participants
| Type of tuberculosis | Sputum smear positive | 139 | 45.3 | 60 | 20 |
| Sputum smear negative | 136 | 44.3 | 33 | 15 | |
| Extra pulmonary | 32 | 10.4 | 50 | 30 | |
| Age | ≤ 14 years | 32 | 10.4 | 42 | 20 |
| 15 – 54 years | 217 | 70.7 | 55 | 18 | |
| ≥ 55 years | 58 | 18.9 | 60 | 19 | |
| Sex | Male | 181 | 59.0 | 35 | 15 |
| Female | 126 | 41.0 | 54 | 20 | |
| Marital status | Single | 73 | 23.8 | 36 | 15 |
| Married | 227 | 73.9 | 57 | 20 | |
| Divorced/widow | 7 | 2.3 | - | - | |
| Education level | Illiterate | 191 | 62.2 | 57 | 20 |
| Literate | 116 | 37.8 | 40 | 15 | |
| Occupation | Peasant | 148 | 48.2 | 60 | 16 |
| House wife | 61 | 19.9 | 45 | 20 | |
| Others | 98 | 31.9 | 37 | 20 | |
| Monthly family income | <NRs2,500 | 233 | 75.9 | 50 | 15 |
| ≥ NRs2500 | 74 | 24.1 | 45 | 20 | |
| Smoking habit | No | 163 | 53.1 | 36 | 15 |
| Yes | 144 | 46.9 | 60 | 24 | |
| Alcohol consumption | No | 219 | 71.3 | 42 | 18 |
| Yes | 88 | 28.7 | 60 | 20 |
Logistic regression analysis of risk factors for patient delay and health system delay
| Type of tuberculosis | Sputum smear positive | 139 | 45.4% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Sputum smear negative | 136 | 44.4% | 0.5 (0.33–0.88) | 0.5 (0.28–0.80) | 0.8 (0.50–1.53) | 0.9 (0.51–1.65) | |
| Extra pulmonary | 31 | 10.1% | 1.2 (0.53–2.93) | 1.3 (0.53–3.08) | 1.0 (0.41–2.40) | 1.0 (0.41–2.58) | |
| Age group | ≤ 14 years | 32 | 10.5% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 15 – 54 years | 216 | 70.6% | 0.5 (0.22–1.30) | 1.0 (0.51–2.32) | 1.2 (0.48–2.89) | 1.1 (0.46–2.81) | |
| ≥ 55 years | 58 | 19.0% | 0.6 (0.30–1.07) | 1.8 (0.71–4.60) | 1.0 (0.36–2.92) | 0.9 (0.33–2.88) | |
| Sex | Male | 181 | 59.2% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Female | 125 | 40.8% | 0.8 (0.53–1.36) | 1.2 (0.73–1.98) | 0.8 (0.45–1.33) | 0.8 (0.44–1.37) | |
| Marital status | Single | 72 | 24.1% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Married | 227 | 75.9% | 1.5 (0.87–2.55) | 0.7 (0.35–1.40) | 1.4 (0.73–2.72) | 1.8 (0.76–4.24) | |
| Education | Illiterate | 190 | 62.1% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Literate | 116 | 37.9% | 0.7 (0.42–1.10) | 0.8 (0.46–1.26) | 1.2 (0.74–2.14) | 1.2 (0.67–2.12) | |
| Occupation | Peasant | 147 | 55.1% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| House wife | 61 | 22.8% | 0.7 (0.37–1.27) | 0.5 (0.24–1.23) | 0.7 (0.34–1.57) | 0.6 (0.25–1.61) | |
| Others | 59 | 22.1% | 0.6 (0.31–1.05%) | 0.7 (0.35–1.29) | 1.5 (0.75–2.88) | 1.5 (0.73–3.06) | |
| Smoke | No | 162 | 52.9% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Yes 5 ≤ per day | 54 | 17.6% | 1.3 (0.73–2.32) | 1.4 (0.76–2.65) | 1.0 (0.52–2.10) | 1.1 (0.52–2.29) | |
| Yes >5 per day | 82 | 26.7% | 2.4 (1.32–4.53) | 2.7 (1.39–5.38) | 2.1 (1.17–3.99) | 2.4 (1.18–4.79) | |
| Alcohol | No | 219 | 71.3% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Moderate | 38 | 12.3% | 1.1 (0.56–2.27) | 1.2 (0.58–2.55) | 1.4 (0.66–3.08) | 0.7 (0.32–1.48) | |
| Heavy | 48 | 15.6% | 1.8 (0.90–3.50) | 1.9 (0.91–3.91 | 1.4 (0.72–2.91) | 0.9 (0.34–2.41) | |
| Income | <NRs. 2,500 | 232 | 75.8% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ≥ NRs.2,500 | 74 | 24.2% | 0.9 (0.52–1.52) | 1.0 (0.59–1.77) | 1.2 (0.64–2.25) | 0.7 (0.40–1.47) | |
| Travel time | ≤ 1 hour | 281 | 91.8% | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| >1 hour | 25 | 8.2% | 1.4 (0.60–3.47) | 1.5 (0.60–3.59) | 0.8 (0.28–2.13) | 0.7 (0.25–1.97) | |
OR = Odds ratio, AOR = Adjusted odds ratio. All variables in the table were included as covariates in the logistic regression model.