The role of active case finding in reducing patient incurred catastrophic costs for tuberculosis in Nepal

Table 5 Association between catastrophic costs and passive case finding (PCF)/ active case finding (ACF) adjusted for each exposure variable at time, Nepal, 2018

Variable	Cases of catastrophic costs per diagnostic method n/N (%) ^a		OR^b (95% confidence interval)		P-value ^c
Variable	PCF N = 45	ACF N = 39	Stratified	Pooled	P-value ^c
Total population	24/39 (61)	20/45 (44)	2 (0.77–5.25)
Variables
Gender
Male	20/31 (65)	14/28 (50)	1.8 (0.56–5.89)	1.8 (0.75–4.44)	0.993
Female	4/8 (50)	6/17 (35)	1.8 (0.24–13.84)	1.8 (0.75–4.44)	0.993
Age
< 60	20/25 (80)	14/30 (47)	4.6 (1.19–19.32)	2.1 (0.86–5.17)	0.043
≥ 60	4/14 (29)	6/15 (40)	0.6 (0.93–3.61)	2.1 (0.86–5.17)	0.043
Disease category
New case	19/33 (58)	17/38 (45)	1.7 (0.59–4.78)	2.0 (0.83–4.78)	0.330
Relapse	5/6 (83)	3/7 (43)	6.7 (0.34–392.48)	2.0 (0.83–4.78)	0.330
Poverty line
Bellow	4/5 (80)	5/8 (62)	2.4 (0.11–156.99)	2.1 (0.87–5.19)	0.924
Above	20/34 (58)	15/37 (40)	2.1 (0.73–6.03)	2.1 (0.87–5.19)	0.924
Dissaving
Yes	13/18 (72)	9/15 (60)	1.7 (0.32–9.60)	1.8 (0.75–4.49)	0.922
No	11/21 (52)	11/30 (37)	1.9 (0.53–6.84)	1.8 (0.75–4.49)	0.922
Financial impact
Poorer /Much poorer	15/22 (68)	14/26 (54)	1.8 (0.48–7.15)	2.1 (0.85–5.06)	0.758
Unchanged	9/17 (53)	6/19 (31)	2.4 (0.52–11.78)	2.1 (0.85–5.06)	0.758
Social impact^d
Yes	10/14 (71)	14/23 (61)	1.6 (0.32–9.13)	2.5 (0.98–6.23)	0.437
No	14/25 (56)	6/22 (27)	3.4 (0.86–14.08)	2.5 (0.98–6.23)	0.437

^a Five ACF and 11 PCF patients with “zero” annual family income excluded from this analysis
^b Odds ratio (OR) was calculated using Mantel-Haenszel method
^c P-value is from homogeneity test in Mantel-Haenszel analysis
^d Social impact: divorce or social exclusion or food insecurity or loss of job or Interrupted schooling

ISSN: 2049-9957