Intervention Effect of New Tuberculosis Control Model on Tuberculosis Incidence in Xinjiang

Figures & data

Figure 1 Spatial prevalence of registered incidence of PTB in Xinjiang from 2012 to 2021.

Table 1 Temporal Epidemic Trend of PTB Registered Incidence from 2012 to 2021

Time	Xinjiang		High-Burden Areas		Medium-Burden Areas		Low-Burden Areas
	Number of Registered Cases	Registered Incidence per 100,000 Population	Number of Registered Cases	Registered Incidence per 100,000 Population	Number of Registered Cases	Registered Incidence per 100,000 Population	Number of Registered Cases	Registered Incidence per 100,000 Population
2012	28,174	132.87	19,211	214.59	6552	92.11	2411	49.63
2013	30,444	141.11	21,062	234.58	6530	90.03	2852	57.82
2014	31,060	140.10	21,344	235.94	6754	92.75	2962	59.07
2015	32,901	148.55	23,426	255.23	6534	90.50	2941	59.09
2016	34,399	151.70	24,761	262.33	6679	93.42	2959	48.62
2017	39,469	171.28	29,603	310.46	7007	96.30	2859	45.88
2018	72,977	311.32	59,964	617.52	9892	134.88	3121	48.79
2019	44,797	187.59	35,645	357.69	6181	80.90	2971	47.35
2020	27,166	113.25	21,379	212.80	3824	50.52	1963	30.81
2021	21,038	85.79	15,763	152.69	3176	43.19	2099	30.72
Turning point		2018		2018		2018		–
APC1 (%)		12.1*		16.8*		4.4*		–
APC2 (%)		−28.3*		−29.4*		−28.6*		–
AAPC (%)		−3.4*		−1.3		−8.0*		−6.1*

Note: *P<0.05.

Figure 2 Temporal trend of PTB registered incidence in Xinjiang from 2012 to 2021.

Table 2 Intervention Effect of “Xinjiang Model” Policy Based on Single-Group ITS

Indicators	Coefficient	95% CI	Standard Error	t value	P value
Xinjiang
β0	10.398	6.300~14.496	2.069	5.026	<0.001
β1	0.056	−0.035~0.147	0.046	1.212	0.228
β2	13.806	7.245~20.367	3.313	4.168	<0.001
β3	−0.746	−0.993~−0.500	0.124	−5.995	<0.001
β1+β3	−0.690	−0.915~−0.466	0.113	−6.091	<0.001
High-burden areas
β0	15.392	6.755~24.030	4.361	3.530	0.001
β1	0.140	−0.052~0.333	0.097	1.445	0.151
β2	31.578	17.576~45.579	7.069	4.467	<0.001
β3	−1.600	−2.121~−1.079	0.263	−6.082	<0.001
β1+β3	−1.460	−1.936~−0.983	0.241	−6.060	<0.001
Medium-burden areas
β0	7.072	5.369~8.775	0.860	8.224	<0.001
β1	0.021	−0.017~0.058	0.019	1.090	0.278
β2	1.916	−0.639~4.470	1.290	1.485	0.140
β3	−0.247	−0.348~−0.146	0.051	−4.840	<0.001
β1+β3	−0.227	−0.317~−0.136	0.046	−4.970	<0.001
Low-burden areas
β0	4.842	4.246~5.439	0.301	16.086	<0.001
β1	−0.012	−0.025~0.001	0.007	−1.805	0.074
β2	0.655	−0.319~1.629	0.492	1.332	0.186
β3	−0.052	−0.088~−0.016	0.018	−2.871	0.005
β1+β3	−0.064	−0.097~−0.031	0.017	−3.860	<0.001

Figure 3 Fitting trend of PTB registered incidence in Xinjiang based on ITS. (A) Xinjiang. (B) High-burden areas. (C) Medium-burden areas. (D) Low-burden areas.

Table 3 Comparison of Policy Intervention Effects Among Different Areas Based on CITS

Indicators	Coefficient	95% CI	Standard Error	t value	P value
High-burden areas
β0	4.837	−1.253~10.927	3.091	1.565	0.119
β1	−0.012	−0.148~0.124	0.069	−0.175	0.861
β2	0.660	−9.212~10.533	5.011	0.132	0.895
β3	−0.052	−0.420~0.315	0.186	−0.281	0.779
β4	10.556	1.944~19.168	4.371	2.415	0.017
β5	0.152	−0.039~0.344	0.097	1.566	0.119
β6	30.919	16.957~44.880	7.086	4.363	<0.001
β7	−1.548	−2.067~−1.028	0.264	−5.869	<0.001
Medium-burden areas
β0	4.806	3.552~6.061	0.637	7.550	<0.001
β1	−0.012	−0.039~0.016	0.014	−0.834	0.405
β2	0.709	−1.215~2.632	0.976	0.726	0.469
β3	−0.054	−0.129~0.021	0.038	−1.420	0.157
β4	2.293	0.520~4.067	0.900	2.547	0.012
β5	0.032	−0.008~0.071	0.020	1.592	0.113
β6	1.272	−1.448~3.991	1.380	0.921	0.358
β7	−0.194	−0.300~−0.088	0.054	−3.617	<0.001

Figure 4 Fitting trend of PTB registered incidence in Xinjiang based on CITS. (A) High-burden areas. (B) Medium-burden areas.