SETTING: Directly observed therapy (DOT), the standard of care for monitoring patients on treatment for tuberculosis (TB), requires substantial health department resources, and can be inconvenient and disruptive for patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether video technology for remote observation of patients on anti-tuberculosis treatment (VDOT) is as effective as in-person DOT. DESIGN: Eligible TB patients in New York City were prospectively enrolled in VDOT from September 2013 to September 2014. We compared treatment outcomes and worker output for VDOT and in-person DOT. RESULTS: Among 390 patients on DOT for the treatment of TB, 61 (16%) were on VDOT and 329 (84%) on in-person DOT. Adherence to scheduled VDOT sessions was 95% (3292/3455) compared to 91% (32 204/35 442) with in-person DOT (>P < 0.01). VDOT enabled a DOT worker to observe a maximum of 25 patients per day, similar to DOT workers who observed patients in clinic (n = 25), but twice that of DOT workers who observed patients in the community (n = 12). Treatment completion with VDOT was similar to that with in-person DOT (96% vs. 97%, P = 0.63). The primary problems encountered during VDOT sessions were interruption of video and audio connectivity. CONCLUSION: Implementation of VDOT resulted in successful anti-tuberculosis treatment outcomes while maximizing health department resources.
SETTING: Directly observed therapy (DOT), the standard of care for monitoring patients on treatment for tuberculosis (TB), requires substantial health department resources, and can be inconvenient and disruptive for patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether video technology for remote observation of patients on anti-tuberculosis treatment (VDOT) is as effective as in-person DOT. DESIGN: Eligible TB patients in New York City were prospectively enrolled in VDOT from September 2013 to September 2014. We compared treatment outcomes and worker output for VDOT and in-person DOT. RESULTS: Among 390 patients on DOT for the treatment of TB, 61 (16%) were on VDOT and 329 (84%) on in-person DOT. Adherence to scheduled VDOT sessions was 95% (3292/3455) compared to 91% (32 204/35 442) with in-person DOT (>P < 0.01). VDOT enabled a DOT worker to observe a maximum of 25 patients per day, similar to DOT workers who observed patients in clinic (n = 25), but twice that of DOT workers who observed patients in the community (n = 12). Treatment completion with VDOT was similar to that with in-person DOT (96% vs. 97%, P = 0.63). The primary problems encountered during VDOT sessions were interruption of video and audio connectivity. CONCLUSION: Implementation of VDOT resulted in successful anti-tuberculosis treatment outcomes while maximizing health department resources.
Authors: Garrett R Beeler Asay; Chee Kin Lam; Brock Stewart; Joan M Mangan; Laura Romo; Suzanne M Marks; Sapna Bamrah Morris; Caroline L Gummo; Chris E Keh; Andrew N Hill; Anila Thomas; Michelle Macaraig; Kristen St John; Teresita J Ampie; Christine Chuck; Joseph Burzynski Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Payam Nahid; Sundari R Mase; Giovanni Battista Migliori; Giovanni Sotgiu; Graham H Bothamley; Jan L Brozek; Adithya Cattamanchi; J Peter Cegielski; Lisa Chen; Charles L Daley; Tracy L Dalton; Raquel Duarte; Federica Fregonese; C Robert Horsburgh; Faiz Ahmad Khan; Fayez Kheir; Zhiyi Lan; Alfred Lardizabal; Michael Lauzardo; Joan M Mangan; Suzanne M Marks; Lindsay McKenna; Dick Menzies; Carole D Mitnick; Diana M Nilsen; Farah Parvez; Charles A Peloquin; Ann Raftery; H Simon Schaaf; Neha S Shah; Jeffrey R Starke; John W Wilson; Jonathan M Wortham; Terence Chorba; Barbara Seaworth Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Judith I Tsui; Brian G Leroux; Andrea C Radick; Zachery A Schramm; Kendra Blalock; Colleen Labelle; Matthew Heerema; Jared W Klein; Joseph O Merrill; Andrew J Saxon; Jeffrey H Samet; Theresa W Kim Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-07-28 Impact factor: 4.852