Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2026
Manualised package intervention to achieve treatment adherence in people with tuberculosis: the IMPACT pilot cluster-RCT.
Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Tuberculosis remains a United Kingdom health concern. It occurs predominantly in people who have lived in tuberculosis endemic countries or have links there. Adherence to anti-tuberculosis treatment can be challenging, especially for people who experience severe side effects or social marginalisation. Poor adherence can lead to treatment failure. Current adherence support interventions make little difference to outcome. We identified the need for a 'manualised' approach to (1) improve case-managers' ability to detect people likely to non-adhere and (2) guide targeted adherence support. Objectives: Synthesise knowledge on drivers and interventions to support anti-tuberculosis treatment adherence Apply the Perceptions and Practicalities framework to understand poor adherence Develop a manualised intervention to identify adherence-related risks, modifiable barriers and support mechanisms Pilot the intervention and assess feasibility of data collection Evaluate implementation through fidelity and reach, and assess impact on adherence Assess intervention delivery costs to guide a full trial plus economic evaluation. Methods: The study ran April 2018-September 2022. Formative work included scoping reviews of adherence literature; National Health Service patients, caregivers, and health worker interviews; and clinic observations. A multidisciplinary group, including people with lived experience of tuberculosis, healthcare professionals, and researchers, coproduced the intervention package. We performed a (1 : 1) pilot cluster-randomised trial ( At intervention sites, additional resources were: Electronic tuberculosis needs assessment completed at all visits. Two animated videos to increase motivation and ability to take treatment. Interactive treatment guide designed around the Perceptions and Practicalities framework. Detailed manual for case managers. Results: We developed a tuberculosis needs assessment for tuberculosis services. This appeared better than standard care at identifying people requiring adherence support [e.g. at baseline 21/36 (58.3%) intervention vs. 4/43 (9.3%) control] and social support (over 24 weeks, on 29 vs. 6 occasions respectively). Cumulative dose-taking was high across the study population at 24 weeks [84% (95% confidence interval 78-91%) overall; 81% (68-93%) intervention; 88% (67-100%) control]. Dose-taking patterns were similar between arms. The videos and booklet produced short-term improvements in beliefs, necessity, concerns and practical barriers. Collecting health economic data using self-completed questionnaires was feasible; retrieving data from records more challenging. The intervention was acceptable to patients and staff though took longer than control to perform. Limitations: Study sample contained few people more likely to non-adhere. Assessments may have altered intervention's effects. Use of medication monitor in both arms may have affected results. Conclusions and future work: The intervention, a National Health Service first, is feasible to use. Its place in care and method of evaluation could be assessed in a larger, definitive study. Trial registration: This trial is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 95243114. IRAS ID: 231542; REC reference number: 18/LO/1818. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/88/06) and is published in full in
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.