IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0150849.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“When Treatment Is More Challenging than the Disease”: A Qualitative Study of MDR-TB Patient Retention

Author

Listed:
  • Kalpita S Shringarpure
  • Petros Isaakidis
  • Karuna D Sagili
  • R K Baxi
  • Mrinalini Das
  • Amrita Daftary

Abstract

Background: One-fifth of the patients on multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment at the Drug-Resistant-TB (DR-TB) Site in Gujarat are lost-to-follow-up(LFU). Objective: To understand patients’ and providers' perspectives on reasons for LFU and their suggestions to improve retention-in-care. Design: Qualitative study conducted between December 2013-March 2014, including in-depth interviews with LFU patients and DOT-providers, and a focus group discussion with DR-TB site supervisors. A thematic-network analysis approach was utilised. Results: Three sub-themes emerged: (i) Struggle with prolonged treatment; (ii) Strive against stigma and toward support; (iii) Divergent perceptions and practices. Daily injections, pill burden, DOT, migratory work, social problems, prior TB treatment, and adverse drugs effects were reported as major barriers to treatment adherence and retention-in-care by patients and providers. Some providers felt that despite their best efforts, LFU patients remain. Patient movements between private practitioners and traditional healers further influenced LFU. Conclusion: The study points to a need for repeated patient counselling and education, improved co-ordination between various tiers of providers engaged in DR-TB care, collaboration between the public, private and traditional practitioners, and promotion of social and economic support to help patients adhere to MDR-TB treatment and avoid LFU.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalpita S Shringarpure & Petros Isaakidis & Karuna D Sagili & R K Baxi & Mrinalini Das & Amrita Daftary, 2016. "“When Treatment Is More Challenging than the Disease”: A Qualitative Study of MDR-TB Patient Retention," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150849
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150849
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150849&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0150849?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150849. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.