OBJECTIVE: To systematically review Indian literature on delays in tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis and treatment.
METHODS: We searched multiple sources for studies on delays in patients with pulmonary TB and those with chest symptoms. Studies were included if numeric data on any delay were reported. Patient delay was defined as the interval between onset of symptoms and the patient's first contact with a health care provider. Diagnostic delay was defined as the interval between the first consultation with a health care provider and diagnosis. Treatment delay was defined as the interval between diagnosis and initiation of anti-tuberculosis treatment. Total delay was defined as time interval from the onset of symptoms until treatment initiation.
RESULTS: Among 541 potential citations identified, 23 studies met the inclusion criteria. Included studies used a variety of definitions for onset of symptoms and delays. Median estimates of patient, diagnostic and treatment delay were respectively 18.4 (IQR 14.3-27.0), 31.0 (IQR 24.5-35.4) and 2.5 days (IQR 1.9-3.6) for patients with TB and those with chest symptoms combined. The median total delay was 55.3 days (IQR 46.5-61.5). About 48% of all patients first consulted private providers; an average of 2.7 health care providers were consulted before diagnosis. Number and type of provider first consulted were the most important risk factors for delay.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the need to develop novel strategies for reducing patient and diagnostic delays and engaging first-contact health care providers.
Persistent gaps in access to quality diagnostic tests undermine progress toward improved health outcomes and resilience to disease outbreaks in Africa. Furthermore, resources for strengthening laboratory systems have faced growing constraints owing to recent reductions in official direct financial assistance, highlighting an urgent need to identify investments that are high impact and minimally donor reliant. In this Perspective, we present a set of priority systems strengthening interventions based on expected impact and feasibility. These include the need for efficient and integrated testing networks, the establishment and implementation of national essential diagnostic lists, modernized procurement and supply chain practices, improved digital health standards and targeted strengthening of testing infrastructure for epidemic-prone diseases. These initiatives should be customized to local contexts and supported by reliable financing, enhanced national leadership and management capacity and updated policies. We propose that collective action focused on these priorities will improve health outcomes and be cost-saving-and will be superior to existing, more fragmented efforts to close gaps in testing. This also provides a pathway to self-reliance in health security and universal healthcare in the Africa region.