Logo of Robert Koch InstituteLogo of Robert Koch Institute
Publication Server of Robert Koch Instituteedoc
de|en
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
2018-03-15Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.11.17-00042
Find and treat or find and lose? Tuberculosis treatment outcomes among screened newly arrived asylum seekers in Germany 2002 to 2014
Kuehne, Anna
Hauer, Barbara
Brodhun, Bonita
Haas, Walter
Fiebig, Lena
Background: Germany has a low tuberculosis (TB) incidence. A relevant and increasing proportion of TB cases is diagnosed among asylum seekers upon screening. Aim: We aimed to assess whether cases identified by screening asylum seekers had equally successful and completely reported treatment outcomes as cases diagnosed by passive case finding and contact tracing in the general population. Methods: We analysed characteristics and treatment outcomes of pulmonary TB cases notified in Germany between 2002 and 2014, stratified by mode of case finding. We performed three multivariable analyses with different dependent variables: Model A: successful vs all other outcomes, Model B: successful vs documented non-successful clinical outcome and Model C: known outcome vs lost to follow-up. Results: TB treatment success was highest among cases identified by contact tracing (87%; 3,139/3,591), followed by passive case finding (74%; 28,804/39,019) and by screening asylum seekers (60%; 884/1,474). Cases identified by screening asylum seekers had 2.4 times higher odds of not having a successful treatment outcome as opposed to all other outcomes (A), 1.4 times higher odds of not having a successful treatment outcome as opposed to known non-successful outcomes (B) and 2.3 times higher odds of loss to follow-up (C) than cases identified by passive case finding. Conclusion: Screened asylum seekers had poorer treatment outcomes and were more often lost to follow-up. Linking patients to treatment facilities and investigating potential barriers to treatment completion are needed to secure screening benefits for asylum seekers and communities.
Files in this item
Thumbnail
25MoJgu9b50k.pdf — Adobe PDF — 357.7 Kb
MD5: edf4c02c22eca5474961940af1da7500
Cite
BibTeX
EndNote
RIS
No license information
Details
Terms of Use Imprint Policy Data Privacy Statement Contact

The Robert Koch Institute is a Federal Institute

within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health

© Robert Koch Institute

All rights reserved unless explicitly granted.

 
DOI
10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.11.17-00042
Permanent URL
https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.11.17-00042
HTML
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.11.17-00042">https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.11.17-00042</a>