To study the impact of active case finding (ACF) among the TB patients detected in South Delhi.

BACKGROUND

TB is one of the top 10 causes of death worldwide. The WHO adopted the End TB Strategy with ambitious goal of ending the global TB epidemic by 2030. The targets for this were 95% reduction in number of TB deaths, 90% reduction in TB incidence rate between 2015 and 2035 and to ensure that no family is burdened with catastrophic expenditure due to TB. Enhanced case detection is one of the components of End TB strategy adopted by WHO and within this Active Case Finding has an important place. However, its role in the Indian context needs to be assessed.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To study the impact of Active Case Finding (ACF) in National Tuberculosis Elimination Program (NTEP) implementing area of National Institute of TB and Respiratory Diseases New Delhi in terms of case detection and treatment outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The TB patients detected during ACF through house to house survey in vulnerable population were identified, evaluated and followed up. Data from ACF records and TB treatment cards were filled in a pretested proforma and compared with passive case detection in the previous month from same area.

RESULTS

In December 2017 a total 8600 vulnerable population (living in slums, camps and night shelters) were screened over two weeks of whom 85 were found to have symptoms suggestive of TB of whom 19 were PTB that gives a case detection rate of 220 per lakh population. PTB case detection rate by passive case finding (PCF) in November 2017 from the same area of our study was found to be 63 per lakh population. This difference between the detection rate in ACF and passive case findings was statistically significant with Z proportion test and p value <0.00001. Treatment success rate was 75% and lost to follow up rate was 25% patients among the PTB patients detected in ACF. In passive case detection from the same area in November 2017 treatment success rate was 81.8% and lost to follow up rate (LTFU) was 18% in PTB patients. Even though LTFU rate was slightly higher but was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

ACF is an effective way to find additional cases of TB. ACF is more labour intensive than PCF but if judiciously used under national programme to target specific vulnerable population of society it can produce additional number of TB cases which otherwise would have gone undiagnosed. However, treatment outcome for these patients is below the target and hence to get the maximum impact of ACF there is a need to enhance the adherence to treatment through different methodologies. Poor treatment adherence will lead to increase transmission risk in communities and greater chance of developing drug resistance. Further studies with larger representative population should be undertaken in order to get more conclusive.