IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002891.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wirelessly observed therapy compared to directly observed therapy to confirm and support tuberculosis treatment adherence: A randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Sara H Browne
  • Anya Umlauf
  • Amanda J Tucker
  • Julie Low
  • Kathleen Moser
  • Jonathan Gonzalez Garcia
  • Charles A Peloquin
  • Terrence Blaschke
  • Florin Vaida
  • Constance A Benson

Abstract

Background: Excellent adherence to tuberculosis (TB) treatment is critical to cure TB and avoid the emergence of resistance. Wirelessly observed therapy (WOT) is a novel patient self-management system consisting of an edible ingestion sensor (IS), external wearable patch, and paired mobile device that can detect and digitally record medication ingestions. Our study determined the accuracy of ingestion detection in clinical and home settings using WOT and subsequently compared, in a randomized control trial (RCT), confirmed daily adherence to medication in persons using WOT or directly observed therapy (DOT) during TB treatment. Methods and findings: We evaluated WOT in persons with active Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex disease using IS-enabled combination isoniazid 150 mg/rifampin 300 mg (IS-Rifamate). Seventy-seven participants with drug-susceptible TB in the continuation phase of treatment, prescribed daily isoniazid 300 mg and rifampin 600 mg, used IS-Rifamate. The primary endpoints of the trial were determination of the positive detection accuracy (PDA) of WOT, defined as the percentage of ingestions detected by WOT administered under direct observation, and subsequently the proportion of prescribed doses confirmed by WOT compared to DOT. Initially participants received DOT and WOT simultaneously for 2–3 weeks to allow calculation of WOT PDA, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using the bootstrap method with 10,000 samples. Sixty-one participants subsequently participated in an RCT to compare the proportion of prescribed doses confirmed by WOT and DOT. Participants were randomized 2:1 to receive WOT or maximal in-person DOT. In the WOT arm, if ingestions were not remotely confirmed, the participant was contacted within 24 hours by text or cell phone to provide support. The number of doses confirmed was collected, and nonparametric methods were used for group and individual comparisons to estimate the proportions of confirmed doses in each randomized arm with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses, not prespecified in the trial registration, were also performed, removing all nonworking (weekend and public holiday) and held-dose days. Participants, recruited from San Diego (SD) and Orange County (OC) Divisions of TB Control and Refugee Health, were 43.1 (range 18–80) years old, 57% male, 42% Asian, and 39% white with 49% Hispanic ethnicity. The PDA of WOT was 99.3% (CI 98.1; 100). Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis within the RCT showed WOT confirmed 93% versus 63% DOT (p

Suggested Citation

  • Sara H Browne & Anya Umlauf & Amanda J Tucker & Julie Low & Kathleen Moser & Jonathan Gonzalez Garcia & Charles A Peloquin & Terrence Blaschke & Florin Vaida & Constance A Benson, 2019. "Wirelessly observed therapy compared to directly observed therapy to confirm and support tuberculosis treatment adherence: A randomized controlled trial," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-19, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002891
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002891
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002891
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002891&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002891?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:pmed00:1002891. 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: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    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.