Community treatment of latent tuberculosis in child and adult refugee populations: outcomes and successes.

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) is the world's leading infectious cause of death, killing millions every year. In Canada, considered a low-incidence country for TB, the burden of the disease is unequally distributed, with most cases of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) experienced by newcomers from endemic regions. The purpose of this study was to measure LTBI treatment acceptance and completion outcomes of LTBI treatment at the REACH clinic in Saskatoon, a local refugee clinic providing primary care-based LTBI management. Methods: A retrospective case series by sampling methodology was applied to review patients who visited the REACH clinic between January 2017 and June 2021 and who had an interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) or tuberculin skin test (TST) done for LTBI screening. Those with positive results were retained for analysis. The LTBI treatment acceptance and completion groups were compared according to demographic variables, WHO regions of origin, year of arrival to Canada, and LTBI treatment regimen. Results: A total of 523 patients were screened for LTBI, of whom 125 tested positive, leading to a test positivity of 23.9%. The treatment acceptance rate was 84.8%, and the treatment completion rate was 93.3%. All of those who declined treatment were more than 18 years of age (p = 0.02). Otherwise, treatment acceptance and completion rates did not vary significantly in association with gender, categories of refugees, WHO region of origin, year of arrival to Canada, or LTBI treatment regimen used. Discussion: The refugee clinic acceptance and completion rates in this study are high and meet Canadian TB standards of care. The multidisciplinary clinic model and community support are important facilitators, which, in combination with shorter treatment regimens, offer a path forward for LTBI management among refugees resettling in low-incidence countries.

Cost-effectiveness of indwelling pleural catheter compared with talc in malignant pleural effusion.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Malignant pleural effusion is associated with morbidity and mortality. A randomized controlled trial previously compared clinical outcomes and resource use with indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) and talc pleurodesis in this population. Using unpublished quality of life data, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of IPC compared with talc pleurodesis. METHODS: Healthcare utilization and costs were captured during the trial. Utility weights produced by the EuroQol Group five-dimensional three-level questionnaire and survival were used to determine quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated over the 1-year trial period. Sensitivity analysis used patient survival data and modelled additional nursing time required per week for catheter drainage. RESULTS: Utility scores, cost and QALYs gained did not differ significantly between groups. The ICER for IPC compared with talc was favorable at $US10 870 per QALY gained. IPC was less costly with a probability exceeding 95% of being cost-effective when survival was <14 weeks, and was more costly when 2-h nursing time per week was assumed for catheter drainage. CONCLUSION: IPC is cost-effective when compared with talc, although substantial uncertainty exists around this estimate. IPC appears most cost-effective in patients with limited survival. If significant nursing time is required for catheter drainage, IPC becomes less likely to be cost-effective. Either therapy may be considered as a first-line option in treating malignant pleural effusion in patients without history of prior pleurodesis, with consideration for patient survival, support and preferences.