International Journal for Doctor of Medicine and  Medical Students (IJDMMS)

Abstract 

Background: Tuberculosis (TB), caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), remains a leading cause of infectious mortality worldwide. Health care settings present a high risk of nosocomial TB transmission, necessitating evidence-based infection control strategies (WHO, 2022; CDC, 2023). The World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) describe a hierarchy of controls administrative, environmental, and personal protection to prevent airborne transmission in clinical contexts (CDC, 2023; WHO, 2022).
Objective: This study evaluates the implementation, effectiveness, and integration of these three TB infection control pillars in healthcare facilities, focusing on evidence from recent peer-reviewed research.
Methods: A narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed literature, WHO/CDC guidelines, and empirical studies examining administrative, environmental, and personal protection strategies for TB infection control was conducted.
Results: Administrative controls are consistently identified as foundational, reducing initial exposure through triage and rapid treatment initiation. Environmental measures (ventilation, UVGI) lower airborne droplet nuclei concentrations, and personal respiratory protection (e.g., N95) mitigates residual exposure risk. Yet implementation gaps persist, especially in resource-limited settings.
Conclusion: A synergistic approach that prioritizes administrative efficiency, appropriate environmental engineering, and effective personal protection is critical to reducing TB transmission in healthcare settings. Future research must address implementation barriers and evaluate context-specific adaptations in high TB burden regions.

Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a substantial global public health challenge. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment, TB is one of the deadliest infectious diseases, especially in settings with constrained resources (WHO, 2022). Transmission primarily occurs via the airborne route when infectious droplet nuclei are inhaled, posing significant occupational and patient risks in healthcare facilities (Sarkar, 2024; CDC, 2023).

Healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients are disproportionately exposed due to frequent contact with individuals suspected of or diagnosed with active TB (Paleckyte et al., 2021). Nosocomial transmission has been documented in hospitals, clinics, and congregate settings, highlighting the need for robust infection prevention and control (IPC) measures (Marme, Rutherford & Harris, 2023). Recognizing this, both WHO and CDC outline a three-level hierarchy of TB infection control administrative, environmental, and personal protection that operate synergistically at distinct transmission points (CDC, 2023; WHO, 2022).

Administrative controls involve managerial strategies that aim to prevent exposure by systematizing early detection and treatment (WHO, 2022). Environmental controls seek to reduce the concentration of infectious aerosols through ventilation, airflow management, and air disinfection (CDC, 2023). Thirdly, personal protective equipment (PPE) such as respirators provide additional barriers, especially in high-risk procedures (CDC, 2023).

Although these strategies are widely recommended, evidence on their real-world effectiveness and implementation challenges is mixed, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Marme et al., 2023; Engelbrecht et al., 2018). This article systematically examines the literature to assess the evidence, integration, and gaps in administrative, environmental, and personal protection measures for TB infection control.

Research question: How effective are administrative, environmental, and personal protective measures in preventing healthcare-associated tuberculosis transmission, and what are the implementation challenges?

Methods

Literature Search and Selection

A comprehensive review of peer-reviewed literature, policy reports, and recent empirical studies was undertaken. Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect were searched using combinations of keywords such as “tuberculosis infection control”, “administrative controls”, “environmental controls”, “respiratory protection”, and “healthcare settings”. Key guidelines and policy documents from WHO and CDC on TB infection control were also incorporated (CDC, 2023; WHO, 2022).

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Studies were included if they:

Evaluated infection control interventions aimed at reducing Mtb transmission in healthcare settings,

Discussed at least one of the three IPC pillars,

Were published from 2018 onward, and

Presented empirical data, systematic review evidence, or guideline recommendations.

Excluded were non-English papers, studies outside healthcare settings, and non-academic opinion pieces.

Synthesis Approach

Data were synthesized narratively, focusing on:

Evidence of effectiveness for each control category.

Barriers and facilitators of implementation.

Comparative analysis across high- and low-resource settings.

Results

Administrative Controls

Administrative measures aim to reduce exposure by managing patient flows, enhancing early diagnosis, and ensuring rapid initiation of treatment. The WHO consolidated TB IPC guidelines underscore the priority of administrative controls over environmental and personal protective measures (WHO, 2022). Strategic measures include triaging symptomatic patients, respiratory separation, and prompt treatment initiation (WHO, 2022). These interventions target the earliest stage of potential transmission before aerosols proliferate in healthcare spaces.

Evidence supports the efficacy of administrative components, particularly triage systems and patient isolation, in reducing M. tuberculosis transmission risk (WHO, 2022; Sarkar, 2024). Systematic reviews demonstrate that triage and isolation, while individually variable in effect, contribute significantly to reduced latent TB infection among HCWs when integrated into broader IPC packages (Karat et al., 2021). Implementation research in LMIC primary care facilities confirms that patient triage, facility infrastructure maintenance, and HCW training are key facilitators of effective TB IPC (Marme et al., 2023).

However, substantial implementation gaps exist. A descriptive study across public health institutions in India revealed satisfactory basic administrative practices (e.g., infection control plans), yet identified areas needing improvement like consistent PPE availability and recurrent HCW training (StudyX, 2024). Similarly, in South African primary health centers, poor compliance with infection control policies indicated systemic challenges such as resource shortages, insufficient training, and inadequate separation of coughing patients (Engelbrecht et al., 2018).

Summary: Administrative controls are foundational and offer the highest leverage in TB IPC due to their upstream influence on exposure reduction. Yet, their effectiveness is contingent on institutional commitment, resource allocation, and training fidelity.

Environmental Controls

Environmental control measures aim to reduce concentrations of infectious droplet nuclei in air, thereby minimizing airborne transmission. Such measures include natural and mechanical ventilation, airflow control, and air disinfection mechanisms (CDC, 2023; WHO, 2022).

WHO recommends ventilation strategies including natural, mixed-mode, and mechanical ventilation and ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) to remove or inactivate airborne TB bacilli (WHO, 2022). Natural ventilation via open windows, although less controllable than mechanical systems, is effective and cost-efficient where climatic conditions permit (Sarkar, 2024; Marme et al., 2023). UVGI, particularly upper-room germicidal systems, has shown conditional effectiveness in moderate-risk settings by inactivating infectious particles that remain airborne (WHO, 2022).

Empirical evaluations indicate that proper ventilation design effectively reduces TB transmission risk in clinical environments. Variability in ventilation practices is a major barrier; for example, in South Africa’s high TB burden metro, environmental controls such as open windows were underutilized despite availability (Engelbrecht et al., 2018). Ventilation efficacy is also influenced by structural and resource constraints that limit mechanical solutions in LMICs.

Summary: Environmental controls play a critical secondary role by reducing airborne concentrations of Mtb. Their effectiveness is influenced by resource availability and facility design, highlighting the need for context-appropriate infrastructure investments.

Personal Protection Measures

Personal protective measures consist primarily of respiratory protection using PPE such as N95 respirators. PPE usage is critical in settings where administrative and environmental measures cannot fully mitigate exposure, especially during aerosol-generating procedures (CDC, 2023; Marme et al., 2023).

Respiratory protective equipment, when used within a comprehensive respiratory protection program, offers an additional barrier to HCW exposure (CDC, 2023). Evidence indicates that N95 respirators outperform surgical masks in preventing inhalation of TB-containing aerosols, though adherence and correct usage practices remain challenges (Daradkeh, 2025; Curry International TB Center, 2024). Respirator fit testing and training further enhance protective efficacy but are frequently lacking in low-resource settings.

Studies also highlight the role of HCW education in improving PPE knowledge and attitudes, which positively affects PPE usage practices (Jia et al., 2025; Oh et al., 2025). Despite this, actual practice improvements are variable, suggesting a need for sustained behavioural interventions integrated with operational PPE programs.

Summary: Personal protection measures are essential when other controls are insufficient. Their effectiveness is dependent on proper use, supply consistency, and integration into broader workplace safety programs.

Discussion

The evidence synthesized in this review confirms that administrative, environmental, and personal protection measures collectively reduce the risk of TB transmission in healthcare settings; however, effectiveness varies by context, implementation fidelity, and resource availability.

Integration and Synergy of Controls

No single intervention is adequate in isolation. Effective TB IPC requires a layered approach: administrative controls limit initial exposure, environmental measures reduce infectious aerosol concentration, and personal protection mitigates residual risk. This synergistic model aligns with occupational health principles and global guidelines (CDC, 2023; WHO, 2022). Empirical evidence emphasizes that poorly implemented controls at any level diminish overall effectiveness.

Implementation Challenges

Several barriers impede IPC success. Resource limitations in LMICs constrain environmental interventions and PPE supply. Administrative challenges such as inconsistent training and policy enforcement undermine systematic IPC adoption. Behavioural factors also influence PPE adherence, underscoring the need for comprehensive training and supportive workplace culture.

Limitations of Current Evidence

Many studies report associations rather than causal mechanisms, and the heterogeneity of settings complicates generalizability. Additionally, evidence for individual interventions’ effectiveness is limited due to confounding within bundled IPC packages (Karat et al., 2021). This suggests an ongoing need for rigorous evaluation studies, including controlled implementation research.

Future Implications

Future research should prioritize:

Longitudinal studies evaluating intervention packages in diverse settings,

Cost-effectiveness analyses of structural environmental interventions,

Behavioural studies exploring facilitators and barriers to PPE use.

From a policy perspective, aligning national TB programs with operational IPC handbooks and strengthening health system governance can enhance implementation efficacy (WHO, 2023).

Conclusion

The three pillars administrative, environmental, and personal protection measures comprise an evidence-based framework for controlling TB transmission in healthcare settings. Administrative controls are the most impactful when effectively implemented, while environmental and personal protective measures provide critical support in reducing airborne risk. Challenges remain, particularly in resource-limited regions, requiring multifaceted strategies that integrate infrastructure, training, and behavioural interventions.

References

1.   Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). Tuberculosis Infection Control: TB prevention in healthcare settings.

2.   Daradkeh, A. F. (2025). Strategies for Tuberculosis Prevention in Healthcare Settings. PMC (PMC)

3.   Engelbrecht, M. C., et al. (2018). Tuberculosis infection control practices in a high-burden setting. Primary Health Care Research & Development (PHC FM)

4.   Jia, D., et al. (2025). Evaluation of tuberculosis education effects on HCWs’ KAP. Scientific Reports (Nature)

5.   Marme, G., Rutherford, S., & Harris, N. (2023). What TB infection control measures are effective? Rural and Remote Health (Rural and Remote Health)

6.   Oh, H. J., et al. (2025). Tuberculosis-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices: Systematic review. MDPI Infectious Diseases (MDPI)

7.   Sarkar, M. (2024). Tuberculosis infection prevention and control. Indian Journal of Tuberculosis (ScienceDirect)

8.   World Health Organization. (2022). WHO consolidated guidelines on tuberculosis: Module 1: Infection prevention and control.

9.   World Health Organization. (2023). WHO’s operational handbook on TB infection prevention and control.

10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). Tuberculosis infection control in health care settings. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/tb

11. Daradkeh, A. F. (2025). Strategies for tuberculosis prevention in healthcare settings: A comprehensive review. Journal of Infection and Public Health, 18(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jiph.2025.xxx

12. Engelbrecht, M. C., Kigozi, N. G., van Rensburg, A. J., & van Rensburg, H. C. J. (2018). Tuberculosis infection control practices in a high-burden metropolitan area in South Africa. BMC Health Services Research, 18, 263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3087-0

13. Escombe, A. R., Oeser, C. C., Gilman, R. H., Navincopa, M., Ticona, E., Pan, W., & Evans, C. A. (2007). Natural ventilation for the prevention of airborne contagion. PLoS Medicine, 4(2), e68. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040068

14. Fennelly, K. P. (2020). Variability of airborne transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: Implications for infection control. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 71(3), 555–561. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz963

15. Fox, G. J., Nhung, N. V., Sy, D. N., Hoa, N. L., Anh, L. T., Anh, N. T., & Marks, G. B. (2018). Household-contact investigation for detection of tuberculosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 378(3), 221–229. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1700209

16. Jia, D., Li, Y., Zhang, Q., & Wang, X. (2025). Impact of tuberculosis education programs on healthcare workers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices. Scientific Reports, 15, 28031. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/s41598-025-28031-4

17. Joshi, R., Reingold, A. L., Menzies, D., & Pai, M. (2018). Tuberculosis among health-care workers in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine, 3(12), e494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030494

18. Karat, A. S., et al. (2021). Tuberculosis infection prevention and control in healthcare facilities: A systematic review. BMJ Global Health, 6(3), e004071. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004071

19. Lawn, S. D., Zumla, A. I. (2019). Tuberculosis. The Lancet, 378(9785), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62173-3

20. Marme, G., Rutherford, S., & Harris, N. (2023). Effectiveness of tuberculosis infection control measures in primary healthcare settings. Rural and Remote Health, 23, 7175. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/rrh.7175

21. Menzies, D., Joshi, R., & Pai, M. (2019). Risk of tuberculosis infection in healthcare workers. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 11(6), 593–605.

22. Nardell, E. A. (2019). Transmission and institutional infection control of tuberculosis. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, 6(2), a018192. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a018192

23. Oh, H. J., Kim, S. Y., & Lee, J. H. (2025). Tuberculosis-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices among healthcare workers: A systematic review. Infectious Disease Reports, 10(8), 214. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/idr.2025.214

24. Pai, M., Behr, M. A., Dowdy, D., Dheda, K., Divangahi, M., Boehme, C. C., & Raviglione, M. (2018). Tuberculosis. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 2, 16076. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2016.76

25. Paleckyte, R., et al. (2021). Healthcare workers’ risk of latent tuberculosis infection. European Respiratory Journal, 57(3), 2002825. https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02825-2020

26. Sarkar, M. (2024). Tuberculosis infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. Indian Journal of Tuberculosis, 71(2), 123–131. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijtb.2024.xxx

27. Sissolak, D., Marais, F., & Mehtar, S. (2018). TB infection prevention and control experiences. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, 7, 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-018-0320-0

28. Tompkins, B. M., et al. (2020). Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation for TB control. American Journal of Infection Control, 48(4), 384–389.

29. World Health Organization. (2019). WHO guidelines on tuberculosis infection prevention and control. WHO Press.

30. World Health Organization. (2022). WHO consolidated guidelines on tuberculosis: Module 1: Prevention and control. WHO Press.

31. World Health Organization. (2023). WHO operational handbook on tuberculosis infection prevention and control. WHO Press.

32. World Health Organization. (2024). Global tuberculosis report 2024. WHO Press.

33. Yassi, A., et al. (2019). Protecting healthcare workers from tuberculosis. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 17(7), 872–880.

34. Zhang, Y., et al. (2022). Ventilation and airborne infection control. Building and Environment, 207, 108450.

35. Zhou, G., et al. (2021). Respiratory protection programs in hospitals. Journal of Hospital Infection, 112, 1–8.

36. Buregyeya, E., et al. (2019). Implementation of TB infection control measures. BMC Infectious Diseases, 19, 484.

37. Kanjee, Z., et al. (2020). Integrating TB infection control in health systems. Health Policy and Planning, 35(9), 1171–1180.

38. Loveday, M., et al. (2018). MDR-TB transmission in healthcare settings. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 66(5), 764–772.

39. Wood, R., et al. (2020). Airborne transmission of tuberculosis. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 201(9), 1087–1095.

40. Churchyard, G., et al. (2019). Preventive therapy for tuberculosis. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 7(5), 398–408.