Table 1. Study Population Characteristics.
| Group | No. of subjects | Male sex, % | Age, mean years ± SD | Auramine score, % of patients | Durg resistant, %a | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1+ | ≥2+ | |||||
| Culture positive | 202 | 49.0 | 33.5 ± 14.4 | 36.1 | 23.8 | 40.1 | 28.9 |
| Eligible, not enrolledb | 109 | 53.2 | 34.2 ± 14.4 | 47.7 | 22.9 | 29.4 | 41.0 |
| Enrolled | 93 | 44.1 | 32.8 ± 14.3 | 22.6 | 24.7 | 52.7 | 15.2 |
| Auramine negative | 21 | 47.6 | 32.3 ± 17.0 | 100 | … | … | 19.0 |
| Auramine positive | 72 | 43.1 | 32.9 ± 13.6 | … | 31.9 | 68.1 | 14.1 |
| Drug resistantc | 14 | 35.7 | 36.8 ± 18.0 | 28.6 | 14.3 | 57.1 | 100 |
| Fully susceptible | 78 | 44.9 | 32.2 ± 13.7 | 21.8 | 25.6 | 52.6 | … |
NOTE. SD, standard deviation.
a
Samples with any resistance to rifampicin, isoniazid, or ethambutol. Resistance was defined as resistant by both the MBBacT and proportion methods. The resistance of samples with disagreement between these methodsormissing data were determined by agreement with the microplate Alamar blue assay test.
b
Nonenrollment was most commonly due to delay in notification of the field research team until after first follow-up time point (1 week), particularly for smear-negative patients
c
Resistance status could not be determined for 5 study eligible patients using the mentioned criteria, 1 of whom was enrolled in this study. These patients were excluded from statistics pertaining to resistance in this table.