Skip to main content

Table 4 Catastrophic cost incurrence and associations with participant characteristics

From: Is convenience really king? Comparative evaluation of catastrophic costs due to tuberculosis in the public and private healthcare sectors of Viet Nam: a longitudinal patient cost study

 

Catastrophic cost incurrence nC/nT† (%‡)

Crude OR¶ [95% CI]

P-value¥

Adjusted OR§ [95% CI]

P-value¥

Cohort

 NTP

33/60 (55)

Ref.

 

Ref.

 

 Private

26/50 (52)

0.89 [0.42–1.88]

0.753

1.26 [0.42–3.77]

0.675

Demographic factors

 Gender

  Male

43/79 (54)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Female

16/31 (52)

0.89 [0.39–2.05]

0.790

0.78 [0.20–3.01]

0.723

 Age, years

  Median age (IQR)

47 (40–59)

1.03 [1.00–105]

0.031

0.99 [0.94–1.03]

0.548

Socioeconomic factors

 Single-person household

  No

53/102 (52)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

6/8 (75)

2.77 [0.53–14.40]

0.225

13.71 [1.36–138.14]

0.026

 Completed secondary education

  No

33/54 (61)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

26/56 (46)

0.55 [0.26–1.18]

0.124

1.88 [0.52–6.86]

0.337

 Employment pre-TB

  Unemployed

10/14 (71)

Ref.

 

Ref.

 

  Formal paid work

8/27 (30)

0.17 [0.04–0.70]

0.014

0.34 [0.04–2.64]

0.303

  Informal paid work

22/36 (61)

0.63 [0.16–2.40]

0.497

2.98 [0.45–19.66]

0.257

  Retired

6/10 (60)

0.60 [0.11–3.34]

0.560

4.85 [0.33–70.55]

0.248

  Student

0/4 (0)

1.00

N.A

1.00

N.A

  Housework

1/3 (33)

0.20 [0.01–2.88]

0.237

0.70 [0.02–21.35]

0.248

  Other

12/16 (75)

1.20 [0.24–6.06]

0.825

6.9 [0.60–80.30]

0.121

 Unemployed during treatment

  No

24/65 (37)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

35/45 (78)

5.98 [2.52–14.20]

< 0.001

10.86 [2.64–44.61]

< 0.001

 Household’s primary source of income pre-TB

  No

32/62 (52)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

27/48 (56)

1.21 [0.57–2.57]

0.629

1.47 [0.46–4.66]

0.515

 Health insurance

  No

7/16 (44)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

52/94 (55)

1.49 [0.55–4.63]

0.394

4.15 [0.63–27.38]

0.139

 Experienced stigma

  No

47/96 (50)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

12/14 (86)

6.26 [1.33–29.46]

0.02

37.9 [1.72–831.73]

0.021

Clinical factors

 Previous TB episodes

  No

55/103 (53)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

4/7 (57)

1.16 [0.25–5.46]

0.848

1.94 [0.22–16.92]

0.548

 Bacteriologically confirmed

  No

17/33 (52)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

42/77 (55)

1.13 [0.50–2.56]

0.770

1.61 [0.49–5.32]

0.433

 Presence of co-morbidity

  No

17/25 (68)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

42/85 (49)

0.46 [0.18–1.18]

0.106

0.43 [0.11–1.63]

0.216

Behavioral factors

 Daily alcohol consumption

  No

54/104 (52)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

5/6 (83)

4.63 [0.52–41.01]

0.170

3.41 [0.24–47.56]

0.361

 Daily smoking

  No

49/91 (54)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

10/19 (53)

0.95 [0.35–2.56]

0.923

0.25 [0.04–1.46]

0.124

Health-seeking factors

 Treatment delay

  No

15/28 (54)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

44/82 (54)

1.00 [0.42–2.37]

0.994

1.22 [0.32–4.63]

0.767

 Hospitalization

  No

42/83 (51)

Ref.

–

Ref.

–

  Yes

17/27 (63)

1.66 [0.68–4.05]

0.266

2.64 [0.60–8.50]

0.226

  1. †Ratio of the number of participants experiencing catastrophic costs (nC) divided by the number of participants belonging to the category in that line (nT). For example, there were 43 participants experiencing catastrophic costs (nC) among 79 total male participants (nT); ‡Catastrophic cost threshold at 20% based on the output approach; ¶Univariate logistic regression; §Multivariate logistic regression incorporating all shown participant covariates; ¥Wald test. TB Tuberculosis; NTP National TB Program