Volmink J, Garner P
South African Cochrane Centre, Medical Research Council, Tygerberg, Cape Town, South Africa.
BMJ. 1997 Nov 29;315(7120):1403-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7120.1403.
To determine the effectiveness of strategies to promote adherence to treatment for tuberculosis.
Searches in Medline (1966 to August 1996), the Cochrane trials register (up to October 1996), and LILACS (Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud) (1982 to September 1996); screening of references in articles on compliance and adherence; contact with experts in research on tuberculosis and adherence.
Randomised or pseudorandomised controlled trials of interventions to promote adherence with curative or preventive treatment for tuberculosis, with at least one measure of adherence.
Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals for estimates of effect for categorical outcomes.
Five trials met the inclusion criteria. The relative risk for tested reminder cards sent to patients who defaulted on treatment was 1.2 (95% confidence interval 1.1 to 1.4), for help given to patients by lay health workers 1.4 (1.1 to 1.8), for monetary incentives offered to patients 1.6 (1.3 to 2.0), for health education 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4), for a combination of a patient incentive and health education 2.4 (1.5 to 3.7) or 1.1 (1.0 to 1.2), and for intensive supervision of staff in tuberculosis clinics 1.2 (1.1 to 1.3). There were no completed trials of directly observed treatment. All of the interventions tested improved adherence. On current evidence it is unclear whether health education by itself leads to better adherence to treatment.
Reliable evidence is available to show some specific strategies improve adherence to tuberculosis treatment, and these should be adopted in health systems, depending on their appropriateness to practice circumstances. Further innovations require testing to help find specific approaches that will be useful in low income countries. Randomised controlled trials evaluating the independent effects of directly observed treatment are awaited.
确定促进结核病治疗依从性策略的有效性。
检索Medline(1966年至1996年8月)、Cochrane试验注册库(截至1996年10月)以及LILACS(拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学文献)(1982年至1996年9月);筛选关于依从性和坚持性的文章中的参考文献;联系结核病及依从性研究方面的专家。
促进结核病治愈或预防治疗依从性干预措施的随机或半随机对照试验,且至少有一项依从性测量指标。
分类结局效应估计值的相对风险及95%置信区间。
五项试验符合纳入标准。对于向治疗违约患者发送的测试提醒卡,相对风险为1.2(95%置信区间1.1至1.4);对于由非专业卫生工作者向患者提供帮助,相对风险为1.4(1.1至1.8);对于向患者提供金钱激励,相对风险为1.6(1.3至2.0);对于健康教育,相对风险为1.2(1.1至1.4);对于患者激励与健康教育相结合,相对风险为2.4(1.5至3.7)或1.1(1.0至1.2);对于结核病诊所工作人员的强化监督,相对风险为1.2(1.1至1.3)。没有直接观察治疗的完整试验。所有测试的干预措施均提高了依从性。根据现有证据,尚不清楚健康教育本身是否能导致更好的治疗依从性。
有可靠证据表明一些特定策略可提高结核病治疗的依从性,卫生系统应根据其对实际情况的适用性采用这些策略。进一步的创新需要进行测试,以帮助找到在低收入国家有用的具体方法。正在等待评估直接观察治疗独立效果的随机对照试验。