Outbreak of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis - Kansas, 2021-2022.

An outbreak of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB) involved 13 persons in four households in a low-income, under-resourced urban Kansas community during November 2021-November 2022. A majority of the seven adults identified in the Kansas outbreak were born outside the United States in a country that had experienced an MDR TB outbreak with the same genotype during 2007-2009, whereas most of the six children in the Kansas outbreak were U.S.-born. Prompt identification, evaluation, and treatment of persons with MDR TB and their contacts is essential to limiting transmission.

Recommendations for Use of Video Directly Observed Therapy During Tuberculosis Treatment - United States, 2023.

U.S. clinical practice guidelines recommend directly observed therapy (DOT) as the standard of care for tuberculosis (TB) treatment (1). DOT, during which a health care worker observes a patient ingesting the TB medications, has typically been conducted in person. Video DOT (vDOT) uses video-enabled devices to facilitate remote interactions between patients and health care workers to promote medication adherence and clinical monitoring. Published systematic reviews, a published meta-analysis, and a literature search through 2022 demonstrate that vDOT is associated with a higher proportion of medication doses being observed and similar proportions of cases with treatment completion and microbiologic resolution when compared with in-person DOT (2-5). Based on this evidence, CDC has updated the recommendation for DOT during TB treatment to include vDOT as an equivalent alternative to in-person DOT. vDOT can assist health department TB programs meet the U.S. standard of care for patients undergoing TB treatment, while using resources efficiently.

In-Person vs Electronic Directly Observed Therapy for Tuberculosis Treatment Adherence: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

Importance: Electronic directly observed therapy (DOT) is used increasingly as an alternative to in-person DOT for monitoring tuberculosis treatment. Evidence supporting its efficacy is limited. Objective: To determine whether electronic DOT can attain a level of treatment observation as favorable as in-person DOT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a 2-period crossover, noninferiority trial with initial randomization to electronic or in-person DOT at the time outpatient tuberculosis treatment began. The trial enrolled 216 participants with physician-suspected or bacteriologically confirmed tuberculosis from July 2017 to October 2019 in 4 clinics operated by the New York City Health Department. Data analysis was conducted between March 2020 and April 2021. Interventions: Participants were asked to complete 20 medication doses using 1 DOT method, then switched methods for another 20 doses. With in-person therapy, participants chose clinic or community-based DOT; with electronic DOT, participants chose live video-conferencing or recorded videos. Main Outcomes and Measures: Difference between the percentage of medication doses participants were observed to completely ingest with in-person DOT and with electronic DOT. Noninferiority was demonstrated if the upper 95% confidence limit of the difference was 10% or less. We estimated the percentage of completed doses using a logistic mixed effects model, run in 4 modes: modified intention-to-treat, per-protocol, per-protocol with 85% or more of doses conforming to the randomization assignment, and empirical. Confidence intervals were estimated by bootstrapping (with 1000 replicates). Results: There were 173 participants in each crossover period (median age, 40 years [range, 16-86 years]; 140 [66%] men; 80 [37%] Asian and Pacific Islander, 43 [20%] Black, and 71 [33%] Hispanic individuals) evaluated with the model in the modified intention-to-treat analytic mode. The percentage of completed doses with in-person DOT was 87.2% (95% CI, 84.6%-89.9%) vs 89.8% (95% CI, 87.5%-92.1%) with electronic DOT. The percentage difference was -2.6% (95% CI, -4.8% to -0.3%), consistent with a conclusion of noninferiority. The 3 other analytic modes yielded equivalent conclusions, with percentage differences ranging from -4.9% to -1.9%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, the percentage of completed doses under electronic DOT was noninferior to that under in-person DOT. This trial provides evidence supporting the efficacy of this digital adherence technology, and for the inclusion of electronic DOT in the standard of care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03266003.

Cost of Tuberculosis Therapy Directly Observed on Video for Health Departments and Patients in New York City; San Francisco, California; and Rhode Island (2017-2018).

Objectives. To assess costs of video and traditional in-person directly observed therapy (DOT) for tuberculosis (TB) treatment to health departments and patients in New York City, Rhode Island, and San Francisco, California.Methods. We collected health department costs for video DOT (VDOT; live and recorded), and in-person DOT (field- and clinic-based). Time-motion surveys estimated provider time and cost. A separate survey collected patient costs. We used a regression model to estimate cost by DOT type.Results. Between August 2017 and June 2018, 343 DOT sessions were captured from 225 patients; 87 completed a survey. Patient costs were lowest for VDOT live ($1.01) and highest for clinic DOT ($34.53). The societal (health department + patient) costs of VDOT live and recorded ($6.65 and $12.64, respectively) were less than field and clinic DOT ($21.40 and $46.11, respectively). VDOT recorded health department cost was not statistically different from field DOT cost in Rhode Island.Conclusions. Among the 4 different modalities, both types of VDOT were associated with lower societal costs when compared with traditional forms of DOT.Public Health Implications. VDOT was associated with lower costs from the societal perspective and may reduce public health costs when TB incidence is high.

Using Video Technology to Increase Treatment Completion for Patients With Latent Tuberculosis Infection on 3-Month Isoniazid and Rifapentine: An Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Since January 2013, the New York City (NYC) Health Department Tuberculosis (TB) Program has offered persons diagnosed with latent TB infection (LTBI) the 3-month, once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine (3HP) treatment regimen. Patients on this treatment are monitored in-person under directly observed therapy (DOT). To address patient and provider barriers to in-person DOT, we piloted the use of a videoconferencing software app to remotely conduct synchronous DOT (video directly observed therapy; VDOT) for patients on 3HP. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate the implementation of VDOT for patients on 3HP and to assess whether treatment completion for these patients increased when they were monitored using VDOT compared with that using the standard in-person DOT. METHODS: Between February and October 2015, patients diagnosed with LTBI at any of the four NYC Health Department TB clinics who met eligibility criteria for treatment with 3HP under VDOT (V3HP) were followed until 16 weeks after treatment initiation, with treatment completion defined as ingestion of 11 doses within 16 weeks. Treatment completion of patients on V3HP was compared with that of patients on 3HP under clinic-based, in-person DOT who were part of a prior study in 2013. Furthermore, outcomes of video sessions with V3HP patients were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: During the study period, 70% (50/71) of eligible patients were placed on V3HP. Treatment completion among V3HP patients was 88% (44/50) compared with 64.9% (196/302) among 3HP patients on clinic DOT (P<.001). A total of 360 video sessions were conducted for V3HP patients with a median of 8 (range: 1-11) sessions per patient and a median time of 4 (range: 1-59) minutes per session. Adherence issues (eg, >15 minutes late) during video sessions occurred 104 times. No major side effects were reported by V3HP patients. CONCLUSIONS: The NYC TB program observed higher treatment completion with VDOT than that previously seen with clinic DOT among patients on 3HP. Expanding the use of VDOT may improve treatment completion and corresponding outcomes for patients with LTBI.