ABSTRACT
X-ray screening is an important tool in tuberculosis (TB) prevention and care, but access has historically been restricted by its immobile nature. As recent advancements have improved the portability of modern X-ray systems, this study represents an early evaluation of the safety, image quality and yield of using an ultra-portable X-ray system for active case finding (ACF). We reported operational and radiological performance characteristics and compared image quality between the ultra-portable and two reference systems. Image quality was rated by three human readers and by an artificial intelligence (AI) software. We deployed the ultra-portable X-ray alongside the reference system for community-based ACF and described TB care cascades for each system. The ultra-portable system operated within advertised specifications and radiologic tolerances, except on X-ray capture capacity, which was 58% lower than the reported maximum of 100 exposures per charge. The mean image quality rating from radiologists for the ultra-portable system was significantly lower than the reference (3.71 vs. 3.99, p < 0.001). However, we detected no significant differences in TB abnormality scores using the AI software (p = 0.571), nor in any of the steps along the TB care cascade during our ACF campaign. Despite some shortcomings, ultra-portable X-ray systems have significant potential to improve case detection and equitable access to high-quality TB care.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recently recommended Video Observed Therapy (VOT) as one option for monitoring tuberculosis (TB) treatment adherence. There is evidence that private sector TB treatment has substandard treatment follow-up, which could be improved using VOT. However, acceptability of VOT in the private sector has not yet been evaluated. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey employing a theoretical framework for healthcare intervention acceptability to measure private provider perceptions of VOT across seven constructs in three cities of Viet Nam: Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh City, and Hai Phong. We investigated the differences in private providers' attitudes and perceptions of VOT using mixed ordinal models to test for significant differences in responses between groups of providers stratified by their willingness to use VOT. RESULTS: A total of 79 private providers completed the survey. Sixty-two providers (75%) indicated they would use VOT if given the opportunity. Between private providers who would and would not use VOT, there were statistically significant differences (p≤0.001) in the providers' beliefs that VOT would help identify side effects faster and in their confidence to monitor treatment and provide differentiated care with VOT. There were also significant differences in providers' beliefs that VOT would save them time and money, address problems faced by their patients, benefit their practice and patients, and be relevant for all their patients. CONCLUSION: Private providers who completed the survey have positive views towards using VOT and specific subpopulations acknowledge the value of integrating VOT into their practice. Future VOT implementation in the private sector should focus on emphasizing the benefits and relevance of VOT during recruitment and provide programmatic support for implementing differentiated care with the technology.
