Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 351887

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : August | Volume : 16 | Issue : 8 | Page : DC16 - DC21 Full Version

Intensive Case Finding of Tuberculosis and Diabetes Mellitus-Bidirectional Screening of Patients Attending a Tertiary Teaching Hospital in Rural Telangana, India


Published: August 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/55850.16712
Kiranmai Sannithi, Tashita Singh, Neelima Angali, Raghuram Prasad, Rajive Kumar Sureka

1. Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, MediCiti Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, MediCiti Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, Mallareddy Medical College for Women, Hyderabad,Telangana, India. 5. Professor, Department of Microbiology, MediCiti Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Raghuram Prasad,
Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, Mallareddy Medical College for Women, Suraram, Telangana-500055, Hyderabad, India.
E-mail: hod.rajive_microb@mims.edu.in

Abstract

Introduction: Tuberculosis (TB) is a communicable disease of global public health threat. Poor and vulnerable populations are mainly affected with it. In association with Diabetes Mellitus (DM), TB may get worsen as increased relapse rates, delayed sputum culture conversion, increase in the case fatality rates etc. Conversely, TB may increase the incidence of DM, and worsen glycaemic control in diabetes patients.

Aim: To study the effectiveness of bidirectional screening for TB and DM in rural hospital.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional cohort study conducted at Medicine and Pulmonology department of MediCiti Institute of Medical Sciences (MIMS) for a period of nine months in June 2019-February 2020. All TB patients were screened for DM and vice versa. All TB patients were followed-up for treatment outcome of TB and all DM patients were followed-up for glycaemic control. Relative risk was calculated using incidence of outcome or control of disease in TB with DM patients to TB patients and DM with TB patients to DM patients.

Results: Of 256 TB patients, 38 (14.8%) were TB with DM cases. All 256 patients were followed-up for TB treatment outcome, 100% TB patients without DM had recovery, whereas 97.3% TB patients with DM had recovery after two months of therapy. Relative risk of DM on TB outcome was 0.97. Of 256 DM patients screened, 9 (3.5%) had been newly diagnosed with TB. All 256 people were followed-up for impact on glycaemic control. Relative risk of TB on glycemic control was 1.87.

Conclusion: Bidirectional screening would potentially improve care and prevention of TB and DM.`

Keywords

Glycaemic control, Pulmonary tuberculosis, Relative risk, Treatment outcome

The TB is the major infectious disease among five infectious killers globally. TB is a communicable disease which remains as a global public health threat, mainly affecting population in developing countries. Every year, more than 9 million people become sick with this infectious disease, and approximately 2 million die because of it. TB in India contributes to one-fourth of the global burden. The prevalence of TB in India is 24 lakh cases (1). Telangana notification rate is 192 per one lakh population. Access to TB diagnosis and treatment is a major concern in people with TB residing in rural areas as it may get delayed (2). Hence it is essential to understand the epidemiology for appropriate interventions. In recent decades, with the increasing prevalence of DM cases in the world along with TB, the association is re-emerging as a public health priority (3). The connection of DM and TB is more significant in developing countries where TB is indigenous and the prevalence of DM is on rise (4).

National Tuberculosis Elimination Programme (NTEP) in India has also taken steps towards prevention of TB through the 3Is project. TB co-morbidities, especially Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), Diabetes and Tobacco have been prioritised (5). These risk groups are to be considered for screening TB. Guidelines are already existing for detecting TB in people living with HIV (PLHIV) and for screening their contacts and in people with DM (6).

The primary objective of TB screening is to ensure early detection of TB and to initiate treatment promptly, with an eventual aim of reducing the incidence of improper treatment outcomes and other adverse ill-effects of TB, as well as helping to decrease the TB transmission. Hospital outpatient and inpatient departments and primary healthcare centres are the preferred sites and groups for screening TB as described by the NTEP. DM, a chronic metabolic disease is growing in number globally, particularly in places where burden of TB is also high. In association with DM, TB may get worsen as increased relapse rates, delayed sputum culture conversion, increase in the case fatality rates etc. even on completion of treatment (7). With the increase in the number of people with diabetes, care and control of TB may be compromised; chiefly in areas with high burden of these diseases (8). The risk increases on delay in the diagnosis. Systematic screening can be advantageous for both the groups.

Theoretically, DM and TB may complicate each other at many levels. TB infection may advance fast in people with dual burden than without (7). Conceivably, people with DM will be more prone to TB than non diabetic people leading to an increased risk of latent TB infection, but there is a feeble evidence. The clinical picture of TB in people with diabetes may change and latest diagnostic algorithms may be needed. Diabetes may quicken the appearance of drug-resistant TB, especially multidrug resistant TB (strains of TB resistant to two first line drugs, rifampicin and isoniazid) among those receiving TB treatment, although the proof is narrow (9). Reciprocally, TB may increase the incidence of DM, and exacerbate improper glycaemic control in diabetes patients (10). Moreover, TB drugs may have drug interactions with the treatment of diabetes, and diabetes may impede with the action of certain antiTB medication.

The interaction between TB and DM should be well documented. So, the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union) in 2011 developed a collective structure for treatment and control of TB and DM that proposed countries to take up few endeavours, such as bidirectional screening for TB and DM (11). Though this is one of the recommendations of NTEP there is limited evidence on implementation and the outcomes of bidirectional referrals (12). Studies on diabetes in TB patients in India are very limited and have used different techniques and criteria (13). This study also aligns to the recommendation from the NTEP, to screen for prevalence of TB in people with DM in medium and high-TB burden places with an average TB prevalence exceeding 100/100,000 population.

With many benefits of early detection and intensive case finding, the present study was aimed for intensive case finding of TB and DM by bidirectional screening and also to identify the effect of TB and DM on their outcome and control in the present study.

Material and Methods

A cross-sectional screening and prospective cohort study was conducted at Medicine, Chest and TB outpatient departments of MIMS for a period of nine months in June 2019-February 2020. Subjects were recruited from patients visiting MIMS located in Medchal mandal one of the rural parts of Medchal Malkajgiri District in Telangana State, India. This hospital serves all patients with communicable and non communicable diseases. This is the teaching hospital with about 700 bedded inpatient facilities. The present study was approved by Ethical committee of MIMS. Ethical committee approval number was EC/16/IV/2k17/(1/27).

Sample size calculation: Prevalence of DM and TB co-morbidities is considered at 20% as the prevalence of DM in TB population ranged from 1.9-45% with a precision of 0.05 and Z score of 1.96 (14),(15). A probability of 5% (alpha), at which results were considered statistically significant, 95% power was applied. The sample size derived for both the groups based on the above measures was 256 each from Medicine, and chest and TB department, respectively. 10% were also added to the sample size for follow-up study. A total of 564 patients were screened and 512 patients were included in the study.

Inclusion criteria: All newly registered TB patients and all newly diagnosed or previously known DM patients with no previous history of TB of age >18 years attending the outpatient department were included after taking informed consent.

Exclusion criteria: In the DM patients group, known TB patients were excluded to avoid duplication. Patients who were lost to follow-up were also excluded from the study.

A total of 256 DM patients from Medicine department and 256 TB patients from TB and chest department of age >18yrs were studied and followed-up by the end of the study after exclusion and lost to follow-up. A total of 52 patients were excluded.

Various objectives of the study, methodology used, benefits and probable risks of present study were explained to the participants. As the study was done in rural population, research assistant had taken adequate care to ensure confidentiality as each participant had been given unique identification numbers without using names and was questioned individually (in their local language) in the examination area of the outpatient unit to ensure privacy and obtained written informed consent. The investigators and research staff signed a copy of confidentiality agreement form before study initiation. Administrative approval from the State TB Cell, Telangana was obtained for conducting the study.

Study Procedure

Potential participants for the study were identified by the physicians in the Medicine, Chest and TB outpatient departments. Data collection was done using a close-ended questionnaire given to the patients. The questionnaire has variables pertaining to age, 17social (based on kuppuswamy scale-education, income and occupation) and demographic information, symptoms for DM and TB, medication used, diagnosis of TB/DM, treatment outcomes. The questionnaire was done in Telugu or English, according to the convenience of the participant, by a research assistant who was trained and expert in the respective languages. The questionnaire was pretested by conducting a pilot testing with 20 patients and necessary changes were made and the questionnaire was validated by ethical committee. All registered TB cases were screened for DM both with symptoms and blood glucose screening. A higher Random Blood Sugar (RBS) (>200 mg/dL)/Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS) (126 mg/dL) prompted the investigator for Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) screening, value of more than 6.5% was diagnosed as DM (16).

HbA1c test: Glycohaemoglobin is a haemoglobin-glucose complex to which glucose gets bound to haemoglobin. Procedure was initiated by collecting whole blood samples in vacutainer tubes containing EDTA and mixed thoroughly. The minimum volume (1 mL) required for analysis was taken directly from this collection tubes and loaded into the Glycohaemoglobin analyser. Results were given as % HbA1c (17).

All registered diabetic patients from Medicine department intensive case finding of TB was done. Intensified Case Finding (ICF) is a screening activity used for earlier detection of probable TB patients in a given population. Patients with any of the four symptoms (4s positive) suggestive of TB were subjected for Sputum examination and/or chest X ray or CBNAAT (if extra pulmonary TB suspected) for TB diagnosis.

Case finding procedures

• 4s symptoms suggestive of TB: 4 symptom screening-cough >2 weeks, prolonged fever, loss of weight, loss of appetite (18).
Chest X-ray posteroanterior view: Pneumonic consolidation±
• lymphadenopathy. Miliary TB (Classic miliary TB is defined as millet like (1-5 mm) seeding of TB bacilli appearing on chest radiography (19)) or pleural effusion or pulmonary oedema are other radiological findings of TB.
• Cartridge Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (CB-NAAT) is a molecular method of detection of genes for Mycobacterium and also rifampicin resistance within two hours. The test was performed as per instructions [CEPHEID, Sunnyvale, CA, USA]. The procedure was done by adding sampling reagent (containing NAOH and isopropanol) and the sample in the ratio of 2:1 and incubated at room temperature for 15 minutes with shaking intermittently. Into each cartridge, 3 mL of this treated sample was taken and inserted in the module of CBNAAT machine. After an automatic process for 1hr and 50 min, results were displayed on the monitor (20).

Once sputum or X-ray or CBNAAT or clinically diagnosed as positive for TB, the patients were sent to Directly Observed Treatment Short course (DOTS) centre, where treatment and further follow-up was done.

Both the groups were followed-up by the Research assistants after the intensive phase of TB treatment and after two months of antidiabetic therapy by contact over phone or home visit. The level of glycaemic control was compared between cohort of DM patients with TB and cohort of DM patients without TB by testing HbA1c levels in blood. Sputum smear conversion after intensive phase was compared between cohort of TB patients having DM and cohort of TB patients not having DM.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0. Categorical variables were depicted as counts (proportions) and Chi-square test was used for comparing categorical variables. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Relative risk was calculated using incidence of outcome or control of disease in TB with DM patients to TB patients and DM with TB patients to DM patients, respectively.

Results

A total of 512 patients, 256 TB and 256 DM patients, respectively were studied for characteristics after excluding 52 patients. Among them Male TB patients were 152 (59.4%), higher in number when compared to female TB patients who were 104 (40.6%). DM prevalence in TB was slightly higher among males 25 (16.4%) than females 13 (12.5%). Similarly, Male DM patients, 147 (57.4%) were higher in number than female DM patients, 109 (42.6%). Prevalence of TB was also high in males 9 (6.1%) compared to females 0 in DM group.

Characteristic features of TB patients and DM patients like age, sex, social and demographic factors, symptoms (DM symptoms in TB and TB symptoms in DM) and medication were compared with the characteristics of TB with DM and DM with TB patients, respectively as shown in (Table/Fig 1). Significant p-value (<0.05%) was noticed in variables such as age and symptoms.

Clinical categorisation of TB patients and DM prevalence in them are shown in (Table/Fig 2). Higher DM prevalence is shown in pulmonary TB 32 (84.2%) than in extrapulmonary TB patients 5 (13.2%) and military TB patients 1 (2.6%).

Screening for DM in TB patients: The results of screening of DM in TB patients are summarised in (Table/Fig 3). A total of 256 TB patients registered under the study were screened for DM by RBS. Among them 37 (14.4%) people had RBS >200 mg/dL. Of the 256 patients, 27 (10.5%) were known DM patients and 229 (89.5%) patients had unknown diabetic status. Among the 27 (10.5%) known DM patients, 14 (51.9%) patients had RBS >200mg/dL, in them 12 (44.4%) had HbA1C>6.5. In the remaining 229 (89.5%) patients, 13 (5.7%) had RBS>200mg/dL, among them 11 (4.8%) had HbA1C>6.5%. Therefore, 11 newly identified and the 27 (10.5%) known DM cases, a total of 38 (14.8%) TB with DM patients was sent to the medicine OPD for DM care. All 256 TB cases were followed-up after two months of initiation of ATT drugs.

Intensive case finding of TB in DM patients: A total of 256 DM patients, have been screened for symptoms of TB and also sent for X-ray, of which 42 (16.4%) patients were diagnosed as presumptive TB basing on symptoms and in them 28 (10.9%) showed X-ray findings of TB. All 42 (16.4%) presumptive TB patients were sent to the TB clinic for further diagnosis and treatment. Among them 7 (16.7%) were smear positive and 2 (4.8%) were diagnosed with extrapulmonary TB. The results of screening for TB in DM patients are summarised in (Table/Fig 4).

The 9 (3.5%) DM patients confirmed with TB were started on ATT drugs.

Treatment outcomes of TB patients on follow-up: The results of the 512 patients came follow-up for treatment outcome in TB patients and glycaemic control in the DM patients separately are summarised in (Table/Fig 5). A total of 256 TB patients came for follow-up, among them only one patient had not recovered from TB (had smear positive after the intensive phase). The patient was a known Diabetic and had improper glycaemic control. So, 218 (100%) of 218 TB patients without DM had recovery, whereas 37 (97.3%) of the 38 TB patients with DM were recovering after two months of ATT therapy. Relative risk of DM on TB outcome was 0.97.

Follow-up of DM patients for glycaemic control and impact of TB: 256 DM patients came for follow-up after two months, the glycaemic control was tested by means of HbA1C. The results of glycaemic control and impact of TB are summarised in (Table/Fig 5). Of the 256 DM patients tested for HbA1C after two months, 115 (48%) had HbA1C >6.5%. Of them, 8 (7%) were DM with TB patients. Of the 9 (3.5%) DM patients with TB, 8 (88.8%) had impaired glycaemic control which was more compared to 107 (46.6%) showed improper glycaemic control among 247 (96.5%) DM without TB patients. Relative risk of TB on glycaemic control was 1.87. Tuberculosis showed significant effect on glycaemic control in DM with TB patients.

Discussion

The finding of the study provides valuable insights into TB-DM prevalence and the impact of each other on treatment outcome. First, bidirectional screening was implemented for TB and DM. All TB patients were screened for DM and vice versa. The reason why all participants registered could be screened was close proximity of TB clinics and Medicine department in a tertiary care centre. But, when follow-up was done to know the impact on treatment outcome of TB and DM, there were drop outs because of the loss or change in contact number of the patients. To overcome this 10% more patients were screened so that number of patients studied and follow-up remains the same in both the groups.

About 14.8% TB patients registered for the study had DM. Nearly 2/3rd of all identified DM patients were known diabetic. According to literature, the DM prevalence in TB patients varies from a maximum of 29% in Puducherry to a minimum of 6.1% in Kashmir valley (21),(22). A large metacentric study found 13% prevalence of DM among TB across India (23). The present study was in correlation with other studies, but showing slightly less prevalence than studies conducted at other places of South India where it is from 12.1% in Bangalore to 29% in Puducherry (24),(26),(27). As this study was conducted in a rural area, there were less number of cases reported; this may be due to more physical activity in people living in rural area compared to the people in urban areas. However prevalence has regional variations, which may also be one reason (26).

In TB patients screened, higher median age patients noted who had diabetes, similar findings in Prakash BC et al., study which showed high TB with DM were seen in >40 years and study by Menon VU et al., identified that the prevalence of diabetes by age showed an increase in number after age of 50 (24),(25). Present study showed association with hyperglycaemia was higher with pulmonary TB showed similarity to other studies (27). In a case-control study in the United States, patients having pulmonary TB had a higher prevalence of DM than the patients having extrapulmonary TB (28).

There are various mechanisms described by which TB can initiate DM. The pressure caused by TB on the body leads to increased hormonal level such as increase in cortisol which in turn increase blood sugars; and also due to let out of different cytokines, chemokines and tubercular proteins may lead to dysfunction of pancreas. This may be due to the deposition of amylin within the pancreas or may be due to entry by the Mycobacteria into pancreas (29),(30).

In present study, nearly 16.4% of DM patients screened had symptoms suggestive of TB. This was higher than in general population, as it was evaluated as 2-3% of patients had TB symptoms (31),(32). Present study found only few TB cases (3.5%), may be due to adequate glycaemic control in patients attending tertiary care centre there could be a low risk of TB in them (33). Other reason for the low detection rate may be due to nonperformance of CBNAAT or Acid Fast Bacilli (AFB) culture for smear negative cases. Inspite of this, these results are correlating with other studies done in DM clinics all over India (34).

Infections are common when there is impaired glucose tolerance, TB is common among them.

The relative risk of DM on TB treatment outcome of TB patients was noted in the study as 0.97. This can be due to absence of unrecovered patients in the control group (TB without DM). Nine studies assessed the effect of DM on prolonged positivity of TB bacilli at 2-3 months of treatment, among them six study groups in different studies have expressed relative risks (RRs) of >2 (35),(36),(37),(38) and three studies stated RRs of <1 (7),(36),(39). Relative risks of improper recovery of TB was ranging from 2.95 in Hispanics, 1.31 in non Hispanic Whites, and 0.93 in non Hispanic Black patients (36).

The impact of TB on glycaemic control is clearly noticed in the present study as 88.8% of DM patients had impaired glycaemic control where as 46.6% of DM patients without TB had impaired glycaemic control. This results correlates with the study by Krishnappa D et al., (27). Relative risk noted as 1.87 in present study. The treatment of the DM is affected may be because of the hampering of drug efficacy or increased survival of the Mycobacteria or due to antitubercular drugs used for TB (40).

Limitation(s)

Long-term studies with bigger sample size are needed to determine the relationship of these chronic diseases in detail.

Conclusion

The present study reports that DM and TB have bidirectional relationship. Considering the increasing burden of DM, particularly in areas with highly prevalent TB, these studies will be helpful for intensive case finding. Interdepartmental collaborative activities would also potentially improve care and prevention.

References

1.
Central TB division, Ministry of Health and Family welfare, National Tuberculosis elimination Programme Annual report. India TB report 2020. March 2020, pg11-17. http://www.tbcindia.gov.in accessed August 2020.
2.
Storla DG, Yimer S, Bjune GA. A systematic review of delay in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis. BMC Public Health. 2008;8(1):15. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Restrepo BI. Convergence of the tuberculosis and diabetes epidemics: Renewal of old acquaintances. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(4):436-38. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
American Diabetes Association, Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Suppl 1):S1-12. [crossref]
5.
RNTCP at a glance. Central TB division, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, March 2014, Available: http://uttarkashi.nic.in/Dept/Health/RNTCP/RNTCP.pdf. Accessed August 2020.
6.
Mansuri S, Chaudhari A, Singh A, Malek R, Viradiya, R. Prevalence of diabetes among tuberculosis patients at urban health centre, Ahmedabad. Int J Scientific Study. 2015;3(4):115-18.
7.
Baker MA, Harries AD, Jeon CY, Hart JE, Kapur A, Ottamani SE, et al. The impact of diabetes on tuberculosis treatment outcomes: A systematic review. BMC Med. 2011;9:81. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Viswanathan V, Kumpatla S, Aravindalochanan V, Rajan R, Chinnasamy C, Srinivasan R, et al. Prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes and associated risk factors among tuberculosis patients in India. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(7):e41367. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Liu Q, Li W, Xue M, Chen Y, Du X, Wang C, et al. Diabetes mellitus and the risk of multidrug resistant tuberculosis: A meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1090. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Bas¸ og? lu OK, Bacakog? lu F, Cok G, Sayiner A, Ates¸ M. The oral glucose tolerance test in patients with respiratory infections. Monaldi Archives for Chest Disease. 1999;54:307-10.
11.
International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, World Health Organization. Collaborative framework for care and control of tuberculosis and diabetes. WHO/HTM/TB/2011.15. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2011: pp 40.
12.
National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS), Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme (RNTCP), Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. National framework for joint TB-Diabetes collaborative activities. New Delhi, India: Government of India; 2017. https://tbcindia.gov.in/WriteReadData/National%20framework%20for%20joint%20TB%20diabetes%2023%20Aug%202017.pdf.
13.
Kumar A, Members of Tuberculosis-Diabetes Study Group. Screening of patients with tuberculosis for Diabetes Mellitus in India. Tro Med Int Health. 2013;18(5);636-45. Doi: 10.1111/tmi.12084. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Ade S, Affolabi D, Agodokpessi G, Wachinou P, Faihun F, Toundoh N, et al. Low prevalence of diabetes mellitus in patients with tuberculosis in Cotonou, Benin. Public Health Action. 2015;5(2):147-49. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Nasa JN, Brostrom R, Ram S, Kumar AMV, Seremai J, Hauma M, et al. Screening adult tuberculosis patients for diabetes mellitus in Ebeye, Republic of the Marshall Islands. Public Health Action. 2014;4(Suppl 1):S50-52. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Harries AD, Satyanarayana S, Kumar AM, Nagaraja SB, Isaakidis P, Malhotra S, et al. Epidemiology and interaction of diabetes mellitus and tuberculosis and challenges for care: A review. Public Health Action. 2013;3(1):03-09. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Torke NS, Boral L, Nguyen T, Chakrin A, Kimball D. Comparison of four methods for Glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) determination. Clin Chem. 2005;51:A242-43. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Getahun H, Kittikraisak W, Heilig CM, Corbett EL, Ayles H, Cain KP, et al. Development of a standardised screening rule for tuberculosis in people living with HIV in resource-constrained settings: individual participant data meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS Medicine. 2011;8(1):e1000391. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Sharma SK, Mohan A, Sharma A, Mitra DK. Miliary tuberculosis: New insights into an old disease. Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2005;5(7):415-30. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Xpert MTB/RIF implementation manual: Technical and operational ‘how-to’; practical considerations. World Health Organization 2014; ISBN: 978 92 4 150670 0 (NLM classification: WF 310).
21.
Vasudevan KP, Govindarajan S, Chinnakali P, Panigrahi KC, Raghuraman S. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus among tuberculosis patients in urban Puducherry. N Am J Med Sci. 2014;6(1):30-34. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Zargar AH, Khan AK, Masoodi SR, Laway BA, Wani AI, Bashir MI, et al. Prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and impaired glucose tolerance in the Kashmir valley of the Indian subcontinent. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2000;47:135-46. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
India Tuberculosis-Diabetes Study Group. Screening of patients with tuberculosis for diabetes mellitus in India. Tro Med Int Health. 2013;18(5):636-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Prakash BC, Ravish KS, Prabhakar B, Ranganath S, Naik B, Satyanarayana S, et al. Tuberculosis-diabetes mellitus bidirectional screening at a tertiary care centre, South India. PHA. 2013;3(S1):S18-22. [crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Menon VU, Kumar KV, Gilchrist A, Sugathan TN, Sundaram KR, Nair V, et al. Prevalence of known and undetected diabetes and associated risk factors in central Kerala-ADEPS. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2006;74:289-94. [crossref] [PubMed]
26.
Anjana RM, Pradeepa R, Deepa M, Datta M, Sudha V, Unnikrishnan R, et al. Prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance) in urban and rural India: Phase I results of the Indian council of medical research-INdia DIABetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study. Diabetologia. 2011;54:3022-27. [crossref] [PubMed]
27.
Krishnappa D, Sharma SK, Singh AD, Sinha S, Ammini AC, Soneja M. Impact of tuberculosis on glycaemic status: A neglected association. Indian J Med Res. 2019; 149(3):384-88. [crossref] [PubMed]
28.
Antony SJ, Harrell V, Christie JD, Adams HG, Rumley RL. Clinical differences between pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis: A 5-year retrospective study. J Natl Med Assoc. 1995;87:187-92.
29.
Schwartz P. Amyloid degeneration and tuberculosis in the aged. Gerontologia. 1972;18: 321-62. [crossref] [PubMed]
30.
Broxmeyer L. Diabetes mellitus, tuberculosis and the mycobacteria: Two millenia of enigma. Med Hypotheses. 2005;65:433-39. [crossref] [PubMed]
31.
Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. Training module for medical practitioners. Revised National TB Control Programme. New Delhi, India: Government of India, 2010. http://www.tbcindia.nic.in/pdfs/Training%20Module%20for%20Medical%20Practitioner.pdf Accessed August 2020.
32.
Santha T, Garg R, Subramani R, Chandrasekaran V, Selvakumar N, Sisodia RS, et al. Comparison of cough of 2 and 3 weeks to improve detection of smear-positive tuberculosis among out-patients in India. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2005;9:61-68.
33.
Leung CC, Lam TH, Chan WM, Yew WW, Ho KS, Leung GM, et al. Diabetic control and risk of tuberculosis: A cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167:1486-94. [crossref] [PubMed]
34.
Jain MK, Baghel PK, Agrawal R. Study of impaired glucose tolerance in pulmonary tuberculosis. Indian J Community Med. 2006;31:117-14.
35.
Jeon CY, Murray MB. Diabetes mellitus increases the risk of active tuberculosis: A systematic review of 13 observational studies. PLoS Medicine. 2008;5(7):e152. [crossref] [PubMed]
36.
Pablos-Mendez A, Blustein J, Knirsch CA. The role of diabetes mellitus in the higher prevalence of tuberculosis among Hispanics. Am J Public Health. 1997;87:574-79. [crossref] [PubMed]
37.
Perez A, Brown HS 3rd, Restrepo BI. Association between tuberculosis and diabetes in the Mexican border and non-border regions of Texas. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2006;74:604-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
38.
Alisjahbana B, Sahiratmadja E, Nelwan EJ, Purwa AM, Ahmad Y, Ottenhoff TH, et al. The effect of type 2 diabetes mellitus on the presentation and treatment response of pulmonary tuberculosis. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45:428-35. [crossref] [PubMed]
39.
Dooley KE, Tang T, Golub JE, Dorman SE, Cronin W. Impact of diabetes mellitus on treatment outcomes of patients with active tuberculosis. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2009;80:634-39. [crossref] [PubMed]
40.
Niazi AK, Karla S. Diabetes and tuberculosis: A review of the role of optimal glycemic control. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2012;11:28. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/55850.16712

Date of Submission: Feb 22, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Apr 13, 2022
Date of Acceptance: May 17, 2022
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: NTEP authority for providing support with OR research grant (2016).
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 01, 2022
• Manual Googling: May 16, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jun 03, 2022 (25%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com