Aim: To determine the feasibility of a collaborative program between private general practitioners (GPs) and the public primary health clinics in PTB screening and to assess the yield of smear-positive PTB from this program.
Methods: A prospective cohort study using convenient sampling was conducted involving GPs and public health clinics in the North-East District, Penang, from March 2018 to May 2019. In this study, GPs could direct all suspected PTB patients to perform a sputum acid fast bacilli (AFB) direct smear in any of the dedicated public primary health clinics. The satisfaction level of both the GPs and their patients were assessed using a self-administered client satisfaction questionnaire. IBM SPSS Statistical Software was used to analyze the data.
Results: Out of a total of 31 patients who underwent the sputum investigation for PTB, one (3.2%) was diagnosed to have smear-positive PTB. Most of the patients (>90%) and GPs (66.7%) agreed to continue with this program in the future. Furthermore, most of the patients (>90%) were satisfied with the program structure.
Conclusion: It is potentially feasible to involve GPs in combating TB. However, a more structured program addressing the identified issues is needed to make the collaborative program a success.
METHODS: Using measures of discrimination and calibration, we tested the performance of the NL-IHRS (n=100 475) and FC-IHRS (n=107 863) for predicting incident CVD in a community-based, prospective study across seven geographic regions: South Asia, China, Southeast Asia, Middle East, Europe/North America, South America and Africa. CVD was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure or coronary revascularisation.
RESULTS: Mean age of the study population was 50.53 (SD 9.79) years and mean follow-up was 4.89 (SD 2.24) years. The NL-IHRS had moderate to good discrimination for incident CVD across geographic regions (concordance statistic (C-statistic) ranging from 0.64 to 0.74), although recalibration was necessary in all regions, which improved its performance in the overall cohort (increase in C-statistic from 0.69 to 0.72, p<0.001). Regional recalibration was also necessary for the FC-IHRS, which also improved its overall discrimination (increase in C-statistic from 0.71 to 0.74, p<0.001). In 85 078 participants with complete data for both scores, discrimination was only modestly better with the FC-IHRS compared with the NL-IHRS (0.74 vs 0.73, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: External validations of the NL-IHRS and FC-IHRS suggest that regionally recalibrated versions of both can be useful for estimating CVD risk across a diverse range of community-based populations. CVD prediction using a non-laboratory score can provide similar accuracy to laboratory-based methods.