METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved laboratory-confirmed drug-resistant TB patients from January 2009 to June 2013. Multiple logistic regression was used to model the outcome, which was subsequently defined according to the recent definition by the WHO. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows version 22.0.
RESULTS: Among the 403 patients who were analysed, 66.7% of them were found to have achieved successful outcomes (cured or completed treatment) while the remaining 33.3% had unsuccessful treatment outcomes (defaulted, treatment failure or died). Multivariable analysis showed that the type of resistance [polyresistant (aOR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.14-7.91), multidrug resistant (MDR) (aOR = 5.37, 95% CI 2.65-10.88)], ethnicity [Malay (aOR = 2.86, 95% CI 1.44-5.71), Indian (aOR = 3.04, 95% CI 1.20-7.70)], and treatment non-compliance (aOR = 26.93, 95% CI 14.47-50.10) were the independent risk factors for unsuccessful treatment outcomes among this group of patients. Notably, the odds of unsuccessful treatment outcome was also amplified among Malay MDR-TB patients in this study (aOR = 13.44, 95% CI 1.99-90.58).
CONCLUSION: In order to achieve better treatment outcomes for TB, effective behavioural intervention and thorough investigation on ethnic disparities in TB treatment are needed to promote good compliance.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The evaluation was conducted among key informants in the National Cancer Registry (NCR) and reporting facilities from FebMay 2012 and was based on US CDC guidelines. Representativeness was assessed by matching cancer case in the Health Information System (HIS) and state pathology records with those in NCR. Data quality was measured through case finding and reabstracting of medical records by independent auditors. The reabstracting portion comprised 15 data items. Selfadministered questionnaires were used to assess simplicity and acceptability. Timeliness was measured from date of diagnosis to date of notification received and data dissemination.
RESULTS: Of 4613 cancer cases reported in HIS, 83.3% were matched with cancer registry. In the state pathology centre, 99.8% was notified to registry. Duplication of notification was 3%. Data completeness calculated for 104 samples was 63.4%. Registrars perceived simplicity in coding diagnosis as moderate. Notification process was moderately acceptable. Median duration of interval 1 was 5.7 months.
CONCLUSIONS: The performances of registry's attributes are fairly positive in terms of simplicity, case reporting sensitivity, and predictive value positive. It is moderately acceptable, data completeness and inflexible. The usefulness of registry is the area of concern to achieve registry objectives. Timeliness of reporting is within international standard, whereas timeliness to data dissemination was longer up to 4 years. Integration between existing HIS and national registration department will improve data quality.