Ethical aspects of directly observed treatment for tuberculosis: a cross-cultural comparison
Journal article, Peer reviewed
© 2013 sagbakken et al.; licensee bio med central ltd. this is an open access article distributed under the terms of the creative commons attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
MetadataShow full item record
Original versionSagbakken, M., Frich, J. C., Bjune, G. A., & Porter, J. D. (2013). Ethical aspects of directly observed treatment for tuberculosis: a cross-cultural comparison. BMC medical ethics, 14(1), 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-14-25
Background Tuberculosis is a major global public health challenge, and a majority of countries have adopted a version of the global strategy to fight Tuberculosis, Directly Observed Treatment, Short Course (DOTS). Drawing on results from research in Ethiopia and Norway, the aim of this paper is to highlight and discuss ethical aspects of the practice of Directly Observed Treatment (DOT) in a cross-cultural perspective. Discussion Research from Ethiopia and Norway demonstrates that the rigid enforcement of directly observed treatment conflicts with patient autonomy, dignity and integrity. The treatment practices, especially when imposed in its strictest forms, expose those who have Tuberculosis to extra burdens and costs. Socially disadvantaged groups, such as the homeless, those employed as day labourers and those lacking rights as employees, face the highest burdens. Summary From an ethical standpoint, we argue that a rigid practice of directly observed treatment is difficult to justify, and that responsiveness to social determinants of Tuberculosis should become an integral part of the management of Tuberculosis.