We assessed video directly observed therapy (VDOT) for monitoring tuberculosis treatment in 5 health districts in California, USA, to compare adherence between 174 patients using VDOT and 159 patients using in-person directly observed therapy (DOT). Multivariable linear regression analyses identified participant-reported sociodemographics, risk behaviors, and treatment experience associated with adherence. Median participant age was 44 (range 18-87) years; 61% of participants were male. Median fraction of expected doses observed (FEDO) among VDOT participants was higher (93.0% [interquartile range (IQR) 83.4%-97.1%]) than among patients receiving DOT (66.4% [IQR 55.1%-89.3%]). Most participants (96%) would recommend VDOT to others; 90% preferred VDOT over DOT. Lower FEDO was independently associated with US or Mexico birth, shorter VDOT duration, finding VDOT difficult, frequently taking medications while away from home, and having video-recording problems (p<0.05). VDOT cost 32% (range 6%-46%) less than DOT. VDOT was feasible, acceptable, and achieved high adherence at lower cost than DOT.
Keywords: California; United States; VDOT; antimicrobial resistance; bacteria; mHealth; medication adherence monitoring; patient-centered care; smartphone; tuberculosis and other mycobacteria; video directly observed therapy; video technology.