Introduction
In Brazil despite advances in public health policies aimed at eliminating and controlling infectious and parasitic diseases, the incidence of neglected diseases is still high [
1]. This country was included in the list of the 30 countries with the highest number of Tuberculosis cases. But among these countries, Brazil has the highest levels of treatment coverage in 2021, along with Bangladesh, China, Uganda and Zambia [
2]. Leprosy is a neglected disease that led the country to be included in the list of 23 priority ones, however, the situation is even more serious, Brazil, India and Indonesia accounted for 74.5% of the new leprosy cases detected worldwide in 2021 [
3]. In the world, in 2021, the incidence of Tuberculosis was 6.4 million cases, with 1.4 million deaths [
2], while for leprosy there were 140,594 cases [
3]. In Brazil, there were 69, 271 new cases of Tuberculosis and 18,318 cases of leprosy [
3,
4].
These diseases associated with vulnerability, poverty and low income [
1‐
4], whose worldwide distribution allows identifying the cartography of this inequality [
1]. This epidemiological scenario prioritized the inclusion of these diseases in the global agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals. The goal of ending these diseases by 2030 can be achieved with universal access to health and intersectoral actions on social determinants [
1‐
6]. These are preventable and treatable diseases within the scope of Primary Health Care. In Brazil, primary health care teams carry out prevention, diagnosis and treatment actions for tuberculosis and leprosy in the health unit itself, with imaging and laboratory tests performed in other services of the health network [
5,
6].
In Brazil, in relation to leprosy, in the Basic Health Unit there is still a lack of basic resources for diagnosis and treatment, in addition to failures in the surveillance of contacts [
7‐
9]. Tuberculosis prevention, diagnosis and treatment actions also have problems related to the attributes of the primary health care, with barriers to access to diagnosis, structure, recording instruments and the need to advance in the articulation between the health care points. The failures that exist in processes related to directly observed treatment have an impact on the results of cure, abandonment and death [
10]. Furthermore, the biomedical care model still persists, it is present even among the Family Health Strategy teams, lack of link between the health professional and the person [
11].
These deficiencies in the structure of the Basic Health Unit and in the processes of the Primary Health Care teams can be analyzed based on data from the National Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care (PMAQ-AB in portuguese). In addition, it also makes it possible to geographically analyze the distribution of Basic Health Units, demonstrating the heterogeneity that exists between municipalities and between geographic regions [
9,
11‐
14]. For diseases such as Tuberculosis and leprosy, the high values of the outcome indicators indicate failures in health care and they also reflect social inequalities [
1‐
4,
15].
The epidemiological scenario of these diseases in Brazil evidences a public policy agenda that has not been resolute in terms of control, nor in terms of elimination. However, it is capable of pointing out the marked regional inequalities that exist even among urban municipalities [
4,
15‐
17]. In this perspective, the analysis of the Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care evaluation data provides subsidies for the health system management actions [
14]. Which leads to the following question: the data of the actions of diagnosis and treatment of Tuberculosis and leprosy, evaluated by the Program for Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care, differ between the Primary Health Care teams that work in the municipalities classified as remote rural, adjacent rural, remote intermediate, adjacent intermediate and urban?
These five (05) typologies described above are the result of different criteria for classifying Brazilian municipalities, proposed by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. In this classification, the criteria of population in areas of dense occupation, proportion of population in areas of dense occupation in relation to the total population and location were used [
16]. Until the literature review stage, this is the first study to analyze data on the structure and process of Tuberculosis and leprosy control actions that were evaluated by the Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care considering the typology of municipalities in rural and urban spaces. Previous studies carried out with data from the Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care associated the population size of the municipalities [
18], the regions [
19] and health indicators [
12] associated with care actions for people with Tuberculosis [
12,
18,
19]. In this context, the evaluation of data on Tuberculosis and leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment associated with the new typology of municipalities is relevant because it brings evidence of the current situation of municipalities and, consequently, makes it possible to compare with the impacts of the Primary Health Care financing policy that has different weights for the transfer of resources according to typology. Thus, the objective of this study was to analyze the actions of diagnosis and treatment of leprosy and tuberculosis in the context of primary health care, based on data from the National Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care.
Results
Thirty-seven thousand three hundred forty-two teams responded to the questionnaire, 56% (20,923) of the teams were from urban municipalities, 30% (11,190) from adjacent rural areas, 10% (3,752) from adjacent intermediaries, 3.1% (1,151) from remote rural areas, 0.9% (326) of remote intermediaries.
Table
2 demonstrates that the place of treatment of the person diagnosed with leprosy in remote rural and adjacent rural municipalities presents a statistically significant difference (
p = 0.0097). Showing a higher proportion of treatment in the reference of adjacent rural municipalities. When rural municipalities are compared with the place of treatment in urban municipalities, there is a statistical difference (
p < 0.0001), with a higher proportion of treatment in the reference in urban.
Table 2
Distribution of leprosy actions by comparison between the classifications of municipalities. Brazil. 2017–2018
When there is a person diagnosed with leprosy, the team: |
Conduct consultation in the unit itself | 27,200 (72.8) | 940 (81.7) | 8,878 (79.3) | 267 (81.9) | 2,949 (78.6) | 14,166 (67.7) | |
Refers the person to the reference unit | 10,142 (27.2) | 211 (18.3) | 2,312 (20.7) | 59 (18.1) | 803 (21.4) | 6,757 (32.3) |
p-value | | 0.0907 | 0.3472 | 0.2181 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Does the primary care team have a record of the number of people with leprosy? | 27,957 (74.9) | 849 (73.8) | 8,175 (73.1) | 267 (81.9) | 2,824 (75.3) | 15,842 (75.7) | |
p-value | | 0.5992 | 0.0003 | 0.0173 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Does the team request bacilloscopy for leprosy to be performed in the health services network? | 35,717 (95.6) | 1,079 (93.7) | 10,710 (95.7) | 313 (96) | 3,608 (96.2) | 20,007 (95.6) | |
p-value | | 0.0019 | 0.6717 | 0.1007 | 0.7786 | 0.0132 |
There was no statistically significant difference in the action of having a record of the number of people with leprosy between remote rural and adjacent rural municipalities (p = 0.5992), but there was when comparing the other classifications, with a higher proportion in these. The action of requesting bacilloscopy for leprosy to be carried out in the network of health services in remote rural and adjacent rural municipalities showed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0019), with a lower proportion in remote rural municipalities. When comparing the others, there was no statistical difference.
Table
3 shows the leprosy actions carried out by the primary health care teams in the unit itself. There was no statistically significant difference between remote rural and adjacent rural municipalities (
p = 0.5992) in the diagnosis of new cases of leprosy, but there was when rural and urban municipalities were compared (
p = 0.0004), with a higher proportion of diagnoses being made in rural. There was no statistically significant difference between the municipalities in the action of notifying people diagnosed with leprosy (
p = 0.0951). As for the coordination of the person's care in the health network, for reference, it was evident that there is a statistically significant difference between rural municipalities, with a greater proportion in remote rural areas of teams that monitor the person with leprosy who is referred to the reference (
p. = 0.0057).
Table 3
Distribution of leprosy actions by comparison between the classifications of municipalities, according to the teams that carry out consultations in primary health care. Brazil. 2017–2018
Do you diagnose new cases of leprosy? | 25,948 (69.5) | 897 (95.4) | 8,513 (95.9) | 255 (95.5) | 2,830 (96) | 13,453 (95) | |
p-value | | 0.5193 | 0.7944 | 0.7681 | 0.0004 | 0.0111 |
Do you notify the leprosy diagnoses made in the unit? | 26,508 (71.0) | 906 (96.4) | 8,670 (97.7) | 261 (97.8) | 2,883 (97.8) | 13,788 (97.3) | |
p-value | | 0.0183 | 0.8236 | 0.5025 | 0.1749 | 0.0951 |
Do you monitor a person referred to reference health services? | 26,624 (71.3) | 906 (96.4) | 8,678 (97.8) | 263 (98.5) | 2,896 (98.2) | 13,881 (98) | |
p-value | | 0.0057 | 0.3215 | 0.0619 | 0.2065 | 0.0083 |
The team performs an active search for the following cases: |
Symptomatic (skin lesions) | 26,511 (71.0) | 911 (96.9) | 8,695 (97.95) | 260 (97.4) | 2,903 (98.4) | 13,742 (97) | |
p-value | | 0.0575 | 0.6352 | 0.0629 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
contact persons | 26,631 (71.3) | 918 (97.7) | 8,693 (97.9) | 259 (97) | 2,900 (98.3) | 13,861 (97.8) | |
p-value | | 0.6011 | 0.3172 | 0.1165 | 0.4627 | 0.3698 |
Treatment abandonment | 25,996 (69.6) | 889 (94.6) | 8,445 (95.1) | 254 (95.1) | 2,827 (95.9) | 13,581 (95.9) | |
p-value | | 0.437 | 0.962 | 0.0662 | 0.0131 | 0.0381 |
The active search for symptomatic people showed no statistical difference between rural municipalities (p = 0.0575). However, there was a difference when comparing this action carried out by the urban teams (p < 0.0001), with the rural presenting a higher proportion. There was no difference in the proportion performing the active search of leprosy contacts (p = 0.3698). The active search for treatment abandonment showed no statistical difference between rural municipalities, but when compared to urban ones, there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0131), with a greater proportion of action in urban.
Table
4 shows the actions of tuberculosis among the municipalities. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated in relation to the place of diagnosis of tuberculosis between rural municipalities, but when comparing the proportions of adjacent intermediaries (
p = 0.0099) and urban (
p < 0.0001) a significant difference was evidenced, with a higher proportion of teams that conduct the consultation at the unit itself in rural areas. Regarding the recording of the number of people with tuberculosis, there is a statistical difference between rural areas (
p = 0.0005), with adjacent rural areas having a higher proportion of teams that register. As well as, a difference was evidenced when compared with the other classifications.
Table 4
Distribution of Tuberculosis actions by comparison between the classifications of municipalities. Brazil. 2017–2018
When there is a person diagnosed with Tuberculosis, the team: |
Conduct consultation in the unit itself | 30,847 (82.6) | 970 (84.3) | 9,458 (84.5) | 278 (85.3) | 3,103 (82.7) | 17,038 (81.4) | |
Refers the person to the reference unit | 6,495 (17.4) | 181 (15.7) | 1,732 (15.5) | 48 (14.7) | 649 (17.3) | 3,885 (18.6) |
p-value | | 0.8333 | 0.7148 | 0.0099 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Does the primary care team have a record of the number of people with tuberculosis? | 31,239 (83.7) | 859 (74.6) | 8,794 (78.6) | 269 (82.5) | 3,006 (80.1) | 18,311 (87.5) | |
p-value | | 0.0005 | 0.0384 | 0.0093 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Which of these tests does the team request to be performed in the health services network? |
Sputum smear microscopy | 36,674 (98.2) | 1,112 (96.6) | 10,981 (98.1) | 316 (96.9) | 3,704 (98.7) | 20,561 (98.3) | |
p-value | | 0.0002 | 0.1549 | 0.0021 | 0.3339 | < 0.0001 |
Chest X-ray | 36,718 (98.3) | 1,107 (96.2) | 10,953 (97.9) | 315 (96.6) | 3,714 (99) | 20,629 (98.6) | |
p-value | | < 0.0001 | 0.1271 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Regarding the request for tests to be carried out in the health care network. The request for Sputum smear microscopy for tuberculosis by the teams showed a statistical difference between rural people (p = 0.0002), with a lower proportion of requests in remote rural areas. When compared to adjacent intermediate municipalities, a statistical difference was demonstrated (p = 0.0021), with a higher proportion of requests in adjacent intermediaries. The results demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the request for chest X-rays among rural people (p < 0.0001), with a smaller proportion in remote rural areas. When compared to adjacent intermediaries (p < 0.0001) and urban (p < 0.0001), a statistically significant difference is evident, with these municipalities presenting a higher proportion in relation to rural.
Table
5 shows the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis carried out by the teams at the health unit itself. As for the 1st Sputum smear microscopy for the diagnosis of tuberculosis being collected in the first approach/appointment, there was a statistical difference between the rural classification (
p < 0.0001), with the adjacent rural areas presenting a higher proportion of collection in the first appointment. There was a statistical difference in this action carried out in rural areas when compared to remote intermediaries (
p < 0.0001) and urban (
p < 0.0001), with a higher proportion in rural areas in relation to remote intermediaries and a smaller proportion in relation to urban.
Table 5
Distribution of tuberculosis actions by comparison between the classification of municipalities, according to the teams that carry out consultations in primary health care. Brazil. 2017–2018
Is the 1st Sputum smear microscopy for the diagnosis of tuberculosis collected at the first approach/consultation? | 21,830 (70.8) | 567 (58.5) | 6,363 (67.3) | 153 (55.0) | 2.041 (65.8) | 12,706 (74.6) | |
p-value | | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 | 0.6787 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Does the team notify people with tuberculosis diagnosed in the unit? | 30,055 (97.4) | 925 (95.4) | 9,151 (96.8) | 272 (97.8) | 3,017 (97.2) | 16,690 (98.0) | |
p-value | | 0.009 | 0.2054 | 0.0759 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Does the team monitor the treatment directly observed by the person? | 29,885 (96.9) | 910 (93.8) | 9,212 (97.4) | 262 (94.2) | 3,019 (97.3) | 16,482 (96.7) | |
p-value | | < 0.0001 | 0.0076 | 0.3963 | 0.1044 | < 0.0001 |
The team performs an active search for the following cases: |
respiratory symptoms | 29,827 (96.7) | 915 (94.3) | 9,195 (97.2) | 261 (93.9) | 3,017 (97.2) | 16,439 (96.5) | |
p-value | | < 0.0001 | 0.0048 | 0.3267 | 0.0226 | < 0.0001 |
contact person | 30,277 (98.2) | 932 (96.1) | 9,271 (98) | 265 (95.3) | 3,049 (98.3) | 16,760 (98.4) | |
p-value | | < 0.0001 | 0.0021 | 0.0787 | 0.0017 | < 0.0001 |
person lost to follow-up (after the 30-day period) | 29,574 (95.9) | 900 (92.8) | 8,993 (95.1) | 264 (95) | 2,963 (95.5) | 16,454 (96.6) | |
p-value | | 0.0006 | 0.9377 | 0.1286 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 |
Regarding the notification of people with tuberculosis diagnosed in the unit, there is a significant difference between rural areas (p = 0.009), with a higher proportion of teams reporting in adjacent rural areas. When compared to urban areas, there is a statistical difference (p < 0.0001) with a higher proportion of notifications in urban areas compared to rural areas.
As for directly observed treatment monitoring, there is a significant difference between rural areas (p < 0.0001), with a higher proportion of teams carrying out monitoring in adjacent rural areas. When compared to remote intermediaries, there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0076), with a higher proportion being observed in rural areas.
In the active search actions of people with tuberculosis, there is a statistical difference between rural people in the active search for respiratory symptoms (p < 0.0001), contact people (p < 0.0001), people lost to follow-up (p = 0.0006), with rural people adjacent areas with a higher proportion of teams carrying out these actions. Comparing the active search for respiratory symptoms carried out in rural and intermediate remote (p = 0.0048) and urban (p = 0.0226) municipalities, significant statistics were found, with both classifications having a lower proportion of active search in relation to rural areas. There was a statistical difference in the active search for contact persons carried out by the teams, when comparing the rural to the remote intermediary (p = 0.0021) and urban (p = 0.0017), with a lower proportion in the intermediate and higher in the urban. Regarding the active search for treatment abandonment, there is a statistical difference between the action taken in rural areas when compared to urban areas (p < 0.0001), with a higher proportion of teams carrying out this active search in urban municipalities.
Discussion
The study analyzed data from tuberculosis and leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment carried out by Primary Health Care teams in rural and urban areas in Brazil. As well as analyzing the data of the tests that are requested by the teams to be carried out in the health services network, from the Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care. In the country, it is observed that even after years of the implementation of the Leprosy Control Program and the implementation of the health care network that led to changes in the organization of health services, obstacles still persist that hinder access and weaken the program [
6‐
9,
11] and, consequently, may have an impact on disease indicators. Urban municipalities have a higher proportion of teams that do not carry out leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment in the unit itself (a higher proportion of treatment in the reference and low proportion of teams that diagnose new cases of leprosy) in urban. Demonstrating problems in access to Primary Health Care, comprehensiveness and coordination of care. This situation and other factors may contribute to the high incidence that occurs in urban municipalities [
15]. This higher number of teams that refer the person to the reference can mean a high number of people with a complex diagnosis or lack of training of the teams to carry out the diagnosis in the unit itself.
In leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment, less than 90% of the teams in all types of municipalities carry out consultations with the user diagnosed at the Basic Health Unit itself, with this situation being more critical in municipalities classified as urban. Thus, there are implications for reducing the population's access to early diagnosis, with greater use of specialized services [
8,
9]. The results of the present study also show that there is a deficiency in the coordination of care in municipalities classified as remote rural areas, since it is the typology with the highest proportion of teams that do not request bacilloscopy to be performed in the network of services and that do not monitor person referred to reference health services. In a municipality classified as intermediate adjacent in the North region, materials for the clinical diagnosis of new cases of leprosy are available in 100% of the Basic Health Units [
7]. In surveillance actions, failures in active search actions were verified, which were also evidenced in municipalities in the North and Northeast regions, in which active search, when performed improperly, increases the chances of transmission and illness in the family network and guarantees the maintenance of the disease between generations [
9].
The fragmentation of care in leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment, by Primary Health Care teams was also observed in all types of municipalities. The results of this study corroborate the literature regarding the difficulties in diagnosis, timely treatment and follow-up of people affected by leprosy [
9,
10]. In general, the results showed inequalities in carrying out actions, according to the characteristics of the territories. As demonstrated in the study, these problems also occur in urban municipalities that have an incipient degree of implementation of the program, with a low proportion of surveillance actions of examined contacts and treatment abandonment, limited standardization of the service flow to person and poor resolution of obstacles by the management [
23]. It appears that the Primary Health Care teams still exercise their assistance in a reactive way, when sought by person with assistance limited to administering the supervised dose without an expanded evaluation of the user [
9].
All care actions for people with Tuberculosis were significantly associated with some type of municipality and the greatest inequalities were observed, mainly in rural areas and remote intermediaries. A study carried out with data from the first cycle of the Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality of Primary Care also found an association with the population size of the municipalities in the actions studied. The highest percentages of teams carrying out active search actions, requesting bacilloscopy, having a notification form and administration of the daily dose of medication by a health professional to the user (the directly observed treatment) were in the metropolises. While small municipalities had the lowest percentages of active search [
18]. However, a study carried out in Rio Grande do Sul in a remote rural municipality found better results related to continuity of care and case detection [
24].
As with leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment, in urban municipalities there is less access to consultations in the unit itself. This result corroborates what was found in urban municipalities in the South and North regions from Brazil [
23,
25]. this context, Primary Health Care assumes the role of regulating the flow, with the main actions attributed to Primary Health Care services being delegated to specialized care [
23,
25]. Tuberculosis actions of diagnosis and treatment when carried out in Primary Health Care units show better results, as the treatment is carried out in the Basic Health Unit closest to home, there is less loss of the day work or appointments for the Tuberculosis consultation and lower expenses with transportation. Directly observed treatment is a strategy that makes it possible to build a professional-user bond [
26], especially when performed in the person's home territory [
25].
In Brazil, the North and Northeast regions have the highest percentages of new Tuberculosis cases notified and followed up in the Primary Health Care. In Pará, more than 80% were monitored in the Primary Health Care. Unlike Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul and the Federal District, where less than 40% of cases were notified and followed up in the Primary Health Care, with new Tuberculosis cases being concentrated in other levels of care [
4], and thus may have an impact on directly observed treatment. The inequalities of access to health in rural areas in relation to urban areas have been demonstrated in previous studies [
27,
28]. The work process of the Family Health Strategy teams is more complex due to organizational issues such as lack of transportation, which is important due to the great distances and dispersion of populations in these municipalities [
27]. The basic service package of the current National Primary Care Policy and the current financing model may further increase the inequalities of municipalities in relation to Tuberculosis and leprosy actions of diagnosis and treatment, since it implies the financing and proposes different modalities of Primary Health Care teams, whose work process does not contemplate the characteristics of the territory and collective health [
10,
11,
17].
The study has limitations regarding the intentionality in the selection of teams that rehired, but the high number of teams reduces the selection bias. While in the database there was no classification of four municipalities, but it was minimized by the small number. The results suggest a reflection on the existing disparities between the regions of Brazil and the municipalities according to the current classification. It is important to reflect on the infrastructure and work process of the teams.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.