Table 2.
Cross-sectional outcomes at analysis closure for adherence club patients
| Before database linkagea |
After database linkageb |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | (%) | N | (%) | |
| Retained | 2857 | (88.8) | 2995 | (93.1) |
| Retained continuously in club | 2497 | (77.6) | 2497 | (77.6) |
| Retained in club with facility based care | 36 | (1.1) | 36 | (1.1) |
| Retained at facility | 324 | (10.1) | 462c | (14.4) |
| Transferred out (TFO) | 75 | (2.3) | 82 | (2.6) |
| Formal TFO | 75 | (2.3) | 75 | (2.3) |
| Silent TFO | – | – | 7 | (0.2) |
| Lost to follow-up (LTFU) | 280 | (8.7) | 135 | (4.2) |
| LTFU – last seen in club | 219 | (6.8) | 46 | (1.4) |
| LTFU – last seen at facility | 61 | (1.9) | 89 | (2.8) |
| Died | 4 | (0.1) | 4 | (0.1) |
aUsing data from adherence club registers and patient clinic folders within facilities.
bAfter database linkage of patients classified as LTFU to city wide laboratory and service access data.
cPatients initially classified as LTFU due to missing clinic folders but found to still be in care at same facility after database linkage.