Abstract
Background:Even when tuberculosis (TB) treatment is free, hidden costs incurred by patients and their households (TB-affected households) may worsen poverty and health. Extreme TB-associated costs have been termed "catastrophic" but are poorly defined. We studied TB-affected households' hidden costs and their association with adverse TB outcome to create a clinically relevant definition of catastrophic costs.Methods and Findings:From 26 October 2002 to 30 November 2009, TB patients (n = 876, 11% with multi-drug-resistant [MDR] TB) and healthy controls (n = 487) were recruited to a prospective cohort study in shantytowns in Lima, Peru. Patients were interviewed prior to and every 2-4 wk throughout treatment, recording direct (household expenses) and indirect (lost income) TB-related costs. Costs were expressed as a proportion of the household's annual income. In poorer households, costs were lower but constituted a higher proportion of the household's annual income: 27% (95% CI = 20%-43%) in the least-poor houses versus 48% (95% CI = 36%-50%) in the poorest. Adverse TB outcome was defined as death, treatment abandonment or treatment failure during therapy, or recurrence within 2 y. 23% (166/725) of patients with a defined treatment outcome had an adverse outcome. Total costs ≥20% of household annual income was defined as catastrophic because this threshold was most strongly associated with adverse TB outcome. Catastrophic costs were incurred by 345 households (39%). Having MDR TB was associated with a higher likelihood of incurring catastrophic costs (54% [95% CI = 43%-61%] versus 38% [95% CI = 34%-41%], p
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | e1001675 |
| Journal | PLoS Medicine |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2014 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
Defining Catastrophic Costs and Comparing Their Importance for Adverse Tuberculosis Outcome with Multi-Drug Resistance : A Prospective Cohort Study, Peru. / Wingfield, Tom; Boccia, Delia; Tovar, Marco; Gavino, Arquímedes; Zevallos, Karine; Montoya, Rosario; Lönnroth, Knut; Evans, Carlton A.
In: PLoS Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 7, e1001675, 2014.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Defining Catastrophic Costs and Comparing Their Importance for Adverse Tuberculosis Outcome with Multi-Drug Resistance
T2 - A Prospective Cohort Study, Peru
AU - Wingfield, Tom
AU - Boccia, Delia
AU - Tovar, Marco
AU - Gavino, Arquímedes
AU - Zevallos, Karine
AU - Montoya, Rosario
AU - Lönnroth, Knut
AU - Evans, Carlton A.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Background:Even when tuberculosis (TB) treatment is free, hidden costs incurred by patients and their households (TB-affected households) may worsen poverty and health. Extreme TB-associated costs have been termed "catastrophic" but are poorly defined. We studied TB-affected households' hidden costs and their association with adverse TB outcome to create a clinically relevant definition of catastrophic costs.Methods and Findings:From 26 October 2002 to 30 November 2009, TB patients (n = 876, 11% with multi-drug-resistant [MDR] TB) and healthy controls (n = 487) were recruited to a prospective cohort study in shantytowns in Lima, Peru. Patients were interviewed prior to and every 2-4 wk throughout treatment, recording direct (household expenses) and indirect (lost income) TB-related costs. Costs were expressed as a proportion of the household's annual income. In poorer households, costs were lower but constituted a higher proportion of the household's annual income: 27% (95% CI = 20%-43%) in the least-poor houses versus 48% (95% CI = 36%-50%) in the poorest. Adverse TB outcome was defined as death, treatment abandonment or treatment failure during therapy, or recurrence within 2 y. 23% (166/725) of patients with a defined treatment outcome had an adverse outcome. Total costs ≥20% of household annual income was defined as catastrophic because this threshold was most strongly associated with adverse TB outcome. Catastrophic costs were incurred by 345 households (39%). Having MDR TB was associated with a higher likelihood of incurring catastrophic costs (54% [95% CI = 43%-61%] versus 38% [95% CI = 34%-41%], p
AB - Background:Even when tuberculosis (TB) treatment is free, hidden costs incurred by patients and their households (TB-affected households) may worsen poverty and health. Extreme TB-associated costs have been termed "catastrophic" but are poorly defined. We studied TB-affected households' hidden costs and their association with adverse TB outcome to create a clinically relevant definition of catastrophic costs.Methods and Findings:From 26 October 2002 to 30 November 2009, TB patients (n = 876, 11% with multi-drug-resistant [MDR] TB) and healthy controls (n = 487) were recruited to a prospective cohort study in shantytowns in Lima, Peru. Patients were interviewed prior to and every 2-4 wk throughout treatment, recording direct (household expenses) and indirect (lost income) TB-related costs. Costs were expressed as a proportion of the household's annual income. In poorer households, costs were lower but constituted a higher proportion of the household's annual income: 27% (95% CI = 20%-43%) in the least-poor houses versus 48% (95% CI = 36%-50%) in the poorest. Adverse TB outcome was defined as death, treatment abandonment or treatment failure during therapy, or recurrence within 2 y. 23% (166/725) of patients with a defined treatment outcome had an adverse outcome. Total costs ≥20% of household annual income was defined as catastrophic because this threshold was most strongly associated with adverse TB outcome. Catastrophic costs were incurred by 345 households (39%). Having MDR TB was associated with a higher likelihood of incurring catastrophic costs (54% [95% CI = 43%-61%] versus 38% [95% CI = 34%-41%], p
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905397273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84905397273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001675
DO - 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001675
M3 - Article
VL - 11
JO - Nature Clinical Practice Oncology
JF - Nature Clinical Practice Oncology
SN - 1759-4774
IS - 7
M1 - e1001675
ER -