Interventions to improve contact tracing for tuberculosis in specific groups and in wider populations: an evidence synthesis

Digital Contact Tracing Apps for COVID-19: Development of a Citizen-Centered Evaluation Framework

Background

The silent transmission of COVID-19 has led to an exponential growth of fatal infections. With over 4 million deaths worldwide, the need to control and stem transmission has never been more critical. New COVID-19 vaccines offer hope. However, administration timelines, long-term protection, and effectiveness against potential variants are still unknown. In this context, contact tracing and digital contact tracing apps (CTAs) continue to offer a mechanism to help contain transmission, keep people safe, and help kickstart economies. However, CTAs must address a wide range of often conflicting concerns, which make their development/evolution complex. For example, the app must preserve citizens’ privacy while gleaning their close contacts and as much epidemiological information as possible.

Objective

In this study, we derived a compare-and-contrast evaluative framework for CTAs that integrates and expands upon existing works in this domain, with a particular focus on citizen adoption; we call this framework the Citizen-Focused Compare-and-Contrast Evaluation Framework (C³EF) for CTAs.

Methods

The framework was derived using an iterative approach. First, we reviewed the literature on CTAs and mobile health app evaluations, from which we derived a preliminary set of attributes and organizing pillars. These attributes and the probing questions that we formulated were iteratively validated, augmented, and refined by applying the provisional framework against a selection of CTAs. Each framework pillar was then subjected to internal cross-team scrutiny, where domain experts cross-checked sufficiency, relevancy, specificity, and nonredundancy of the attributes, and their organization in pillars. The consolidated framework was further validated on the selected CTAs to create a finalized version of C³EF for CTAs, which we offer in this paper.

Results

The final framework presents seven pillars exploring issues related to CTA design, adoption, and use: (General) Characteristics, Usability, Data Protection, Effectiveness, Transparency, Technical Performance, and Citizen Autonomy. The pillars encompass attributes, subattributes, and a set of illustrative questions (with associated example answers) to support app design, evaluation, and evolution. An online version of the framework has been made available to developers, health authorities, and others interested in assessing CTAs.

Conclusions

Our CTA framework provides a holistic compare-and-contrast tool that supports the work of decision-makers in the development and evolution of CTAs for citizens. This framework supports reflection on design decisions to better understand and optimize the design compromises in play when evolving current CTAs for increased public adoption. We intend this framework to serve as a foundation for other researchers to build on and extend as the technology matures and new CTAs become available.

Tuberculosis contact tracing yield and associated factors in Uganda

BACKGROUND

The yield of tuberculosis (TB) contact tracing is historically low in Uganda. We determined factors associated with a positive contact tracing yield at an urban public TB clinic in Kampala, Uganda.

METHODS

We reviewed contact tracing registers of index TB cases registered between 2015 and 2020 at Kitebi Health Center, a primary level facility. Contacts who had symptoms of TB were designated as having presumptive TB. A contact investigation that yielded a new TB case was designated as a positive yield. We used logistic regression to determine factors associated with a positive yield of contact tracing.

RESULTS

Of 778 index TB cases, 455 (58.5%) had a contact investigation conducted. Index cases with a telephone contact in the unit TB register (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.66, 95% CI 1.02-1.97, p = 0.036) were more likely to have a contact investigation conducted than those who did not. Of 1350 contacts, 105 (7.8%) had presumptive TB. Of these, 73 (69.5%) were further evaluated for active TB and 29 contacts had active TB. The contact tracing yield for active TB was therefore 2.1% (29/1,350). The odds of a positive yield increased tenfold with each additional presumptive contact evaluated for active TB (aOR 10.1, 95% CI 2.95-34.66, p < 0.001). Also, retreatment index TB cases were more likely to yield a positive contact (aOR 7.69 95% CI 2.08-25.00, p = 0.002) than to new cases.

CONCLUSION

TB contact tracing should aim to evaluate all contacts with presumptive TB and contacts of retreatment cases to maximise the yield of contact tracing.

Effectiveness of contact tracing in the control of infectious diseases: a systematic review

Background

Contact tracing is used for multiple infectious diseases, most recently for COVID-19, but data regarding its effectiveness in disease control are scarce. To address this knowledge gap and inform public health decision making for COVID-19, we systematically reviewed the existing literature to determine the effectiveness of contact tracing in the control of communicable illness.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception up to Nov 22, 2021, for published studies evaluating associations between provider-initiated contact tracing for transmissible infectious diseases and one of three outcomes of interest: case detection rates among contacts or at the community level, overall forward transmission, or overall disease incidence. Clinical trials and observational studies were eligible, with no language or date restrictions. Reference lists of reviews were searched for additional studies. We excluded studies without a control group, using only mathematical modelling, not reporting a primary outcome of interest, or solely examining patient-initiated contact tracing. One reviewer applied eligibility criteria to each screened abstract and full-text article, and two reviewers independently extracted summary effect estimates and additional data from eligible studies. Only data reported in published manuscripts or supplemental material was extracted. Risk of bias for each included study was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool (randomised studies) or the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (non-randomised studies).

Findings

We identified 9050 unique citations, of which 47 studies met the inclusion criteria: six were focused on COVID-19, 20 on tuberculosis, eight on HIV, 12 on curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and one on measles. More than 2 million index patients were included across a variety of settings (both urban and rural areas and low-resource and high-resource settings). Of the 47 studies, 29 (61·7%) used observational designs, including all studies on COVID-19, and 18 (38·3%) were randomised controlled trials. 40 studies compared provider-initiated contact tracing with other interventions or evaluated expansions of provider-initiated contact tracing, and seven compared programmatic adaptations within provider-initiated contact tracing. 29 (72·5%) of the 40 studies evaluating the effect of provider-initiated contact tracing, including four (66·7%) of six COVID-19 studies, found contact tracing interventions were associated with improvements in at least one outcome of interest. 23 (48·9%) studies had low risk of bias, 22 (46·8%) studies had some risk of bias, and two (4·3%) studies (both randomised controlled trials on curable STIs) had high risk of bias.

Interpretation

Provider-initiated contact tracing can be an effective public health tool. However, the ability of authorities to make informed choices about its deployment might be limited by heterogenous approaches to contact tracing in studies, a scarcity of quantitative evidence on its effectiveness, and absence of specificity of tracing parameters most important for disease control.

Funding

The Sullivan Family Foundation, Massachusetts General Hospital Executive Committee on Research, and US National Institutes of Health.

Factors influencing active tuberculosis case-finding policy development and implementation: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To explore antecedents, components and influencing factors on active case-finding (ACF) policy development and implementation.

DESIGN

Scoping review, searching MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the World Health Organization (WHO) Library from January 1968 to January 2018. We excluded studies focusing on latent tuberculosis (TB) infection, passive case-finding, childhood TB and studies about effectiveness, yield, accuracy and impact without descriptions of how this evidence has/could influence ACF policy or implementation. We included any type of study written in English, and conducted frequency and thematic analyses.

RESULTS

Seventy-three articles fulfilled our eligibility criteria. Most (67%) were published after 2010. The studies were conducted in all WHO regions, but primarily in Africa (22%), Europe (23%) and the Western-Pacific region (12%). Forty-one percent of the studies were classified as quantitative, followed by reviews (22%) and qualitative studies (12%). Most articles focused on ACF for tuberculosis contacts (25%) or migrants (32%). Fourteen percent of the articles described community-based screening of high-risk populations. Fifty-nine percent of studies reported influencing factors for ACF implementation; mostly linked to the health system (eg, resources) and the community/individual (eg, social determinants of health). Only two articles highlighted factors influencing ACF policy development (eg, politics). Six articles described WHO's ACF-related recommendations as important antecedent for ACF. Key components of successful ACF implementation include health system capacity, mechanisms for integration, education and collaboration for ACF.

CONCLUSION

We identified some main themes regarding the antecedents, components and influencing factors for ACF policy development and implementation. While we know much about facilitators and barriers for ACF policy implementation, we know less about how to strengthen those facilitators and how to overcome those barriers. A major knowledge gap remains when it comes to understanding which contextual factors influence ACF policy development. Research is required to understand, inform and improve ACF policy development and implementation.

Recommendations for the screening of paediatric latent tuberculosis infection in indigenous communities: a systematic review of screening strategies among high-risk groups in low-incidence countries

Background

Tuberculosis (TB) continues to be a global public health concern. Due to the presence of multiple risk factors such as poor housing conditions and food insecurity in Canadian Indigenous communities, this population is at particularly high risk of TB infection. Given the challenges of screening for latent TB infection (LTBI) in remote communities, a synthesis of the existing literature regarding current screening strategies among high-risk groups in low-incidence countries is warranted, in order to provide an evidence base for the optimization of paediatric LTBI screening practices in the Canadian Indigenous context.

Methods

A literature search of the Embase and Medline databases was conducted, and studies pertaining the evaluation of screening strategies or screening tools for LTBI in paediatric high-risk groups in low-incidence countries were included. Studies focusing on LTBI screening in Indigenous communities were also included, regardless of whether they focused on a paediatric population. Their results were summarized and discussed in the context of their relevance to screening strategies suitable to the Canadian Indigenous setting. Grey literature sources such as government reports or policy briefs were also consulted.

Results

The initial literature search returned 327 studies, with 266 being excluded after abstract screening, and 36 studies being included in the final review (original research studies: n = 25, review papers or policy recommendations: n = 11). In the examined studies, case identification and cost-effectiveness of universal screening were low in low-incidence countries. Therefore, studies generally recommended targeted screening of high-risk groups in low-incidence countries, however, there remains a lack of consensus regarding cut-offs for the incidence-based screening of high-risk communities, as well as regarding the utility and prioritization of individual risk-factor-based screening of high-risk groups. The utility of the TST compared to IGRAs for LTBI detection in the pediatric population also remains contested.

Conclusions

Relevant strategies for targeted screening in the Canadian Indigenous context include community-level incidence-based screening (screening based on geographic location within high-incidence communities), as well as individual risk-factor-based screening, taking into account pertinent risk factors in Indigenous settings, such as poor housing conditions, malnutrition, contact with an active case, or the presence of relevant co-morbidities, such as renal disease.