title: Directly observed therapy for treating tuberculosis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  For tuberculosis treatment, policies have been introduced to encourage adherence to treatment regimens. One such policy is directly observed therapy (DOT), which involves people directly observing patients taking their antituberculous drugs.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare DOT with self administration of treatment or different DOT options for people requiring treatment for clinically active tuberculosis or prevention of active disease.
  
  
  METHODS
  In May 2007, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and mRCT. We also checked article reference lists and contacted relevant researchers and organizations.
  
  
  METHODS
  Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing a health worker, family member, or community volunteer routinely observing people taking antituberculous drugs compared with routine self administration of treatment at home. We include people requiring treatment for clinically active tuberculosis or medication for preventing active disease.
  
  
  METHODS
  Both authors independently assessed trial methodological quality and extracted data. Data were analysed using relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the fixed-effect model when there was no statistically significant heterogeneity (chi square P > 0.1). Trials of drug users were analysed separately.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Eleven trials with 5609 participants met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant difference was detected between DOT and self administration in terms of cure (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21, random-effects model; 1603 participants, 4 trials), with similar results for cure plus completion of treatment. When stratified by location, DOT provided at home compared with DOT provided at clinic suggests a possible small advantage with home-based DOT for cure (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18; 1365 participants, 3 trials). There was no significant difference detected in clinical outcomes between DOT at a clinic versus by a family member or community health worker (2 trials), or for DOT provided by a family member versus a community health worker (1326 participants, 1 trial). Two small trials of tuberculosis prophylaxis in intravenous drugs users found no statistically significant difference between DOT and self administration (199 participants, 1 trial) or a choice of location for DOT for completion of treatment (108 participants, 1 trial).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of randomized controlled trials conducted in low-, middle-, and high-income countries provide no assurance that DOT compared with self administration of treatment has any quantitatively important effect on cure or treatment completion in people receiving treatment for tuberculosis.
authors.affiliation: Stellenbosch University, Faculty of Health Sciences, PO Box 19063, Tygerberg, Cape Town, South Africa, 7505. jvolmink@sun.ac.za
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Volmink
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Garner
mesh_terms: D000995:Antitubercular Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D023801:Directly Observed Therapy; D006801:Humans; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D014397:Tuberculosis, Pulmonary / Q000188:drug therapy*
chemical_list: D000995:Antitubercular Agents