4.7 Article

Tuberculosis 2013:5 Drug-resistant tuberculosis: time for visionary political leadership

期刊

LANCET INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 529-539

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70030-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, Netherlands
  2. UK Medical Research Council (MRC)
  3. UBS Optimus Foundation, Switzerland
  4. University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UK
  5. UCLH National Health Service Foundation Trust, UK
  6. UK National Institute for Health Research
  7. Wellcome Trust, UK

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two decades ago, WHO declared tuberculosis a global emergency, and invested in the highly cost-effective directly observed treatment short-course programme to control the epidemic. At that time, most strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis were susceptible to first-line tuberculosis drugs, and drug resistance was not a major issue. However, in 2013, tuberculosis remains a major public health concern worldwide, with prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis rising. WHO estimates roughly 630 000 cases of MDR tuberculosis worldwide, with great variation in the frequency of MDR tuberculosis between countries. In the past 8 years, extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis has emerged, and has been reported in 84 countries, heralding the possibility of virtually untreatable tuberculosis. Increased population movement, the continuing HIV pandemic, and the rise in MDR tuberculosis pose formidable challenges to the global control of tuberculosis. We provide an overview of the global burden of drug-resistant disease; discuss the social, health service, management, and control issues that fuel and sustain the epidemic; and suggest specific recommendations for important next steps. Visionary political leadership is needed to curb the rise of MDR and XDR tuberculosis worldwide, through sustained funding and the implementation of global and regional action plans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据