4.7 Review

Quality of tuberculosis care in high burden countries: the urgent need to address gaps in the care cascade

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2016.10.016

关键词

Tuberculosis; Quality of care; Cascade of care; Quality improvement; Standards for TB care

资金

  1. Center for Operations Research, Paris, France
  2. Harvard Catalyst KL2/Catalyst Medical Investigator Training award [KL2 TR001100]
  3. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  4. IC-IMPACTS
  5. TB REACH
  6. Canada Research Chair Award from CIHR
  7. FIND
  8. Geneva

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the high coverage of directly observed treatment short-course (DOTS), tuberculosis (TB) continues to affect 10.4 million people each year, and kills 1.8 million. High TB mortality, the large number of missing TB cases, the emergence of severe forms of drug resistance, and the slow decline in TB incidence indicate that merely expanding the coverage of TB services is insufficient to end the epidemic. In the era of the End TB Strategy, we need to think beyond coverage and start focusing on the quality of TB care that is routinely offered to patients in high burden countries, in both public and private sectors. In this review, current evidence on the quality of TB care in high burden countries, major gaps in the quality of care, and some novel efforts to measure and improve the quality of care are described. Based on systematic reviews on the quality of TB care or surrogates of quality (e.g., TB diagnostic delays), analyses of TB care cascades, and newer studies that directly measure quality of care, it is shown that the quality of care in both the public and private sector falls short of international standards and urgently needs improvement. National TB programs will therefore need to systematically measure and improve quality of TB care and invest in quality improvement programs. (C) 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

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