## 3 Results
### Characteristics Reported at the Time of Inclusion in the Psychosocial Support Program  
In an analysis of the relationship between treatment phase at project entry and treatment outcome, it appears that treatment success is more prevalent among patients--with TB-DS or DR-TB--who, at project entry, were at least in the sixth month of treatment (T6). Loss to follow-up is more frequent among DR-TB patients enrolled in the intensive phase of treatment, and deaths are more common among DR-TB patients who entered the project at T3-T6 (Table 4). Considering patients in the Intensive Treatment Phase (T0-T2), the data show that among those with TB-DS, the proportion of patients declared cured is 21 percentage points higher than among DR-TB patients (64% vs. 43%). Considering patients in Phase I of treatment continuation (T3-T6), the data show that the proportion of patients declared cured is 39 percentage points higher among those with TB-DS than among those with DR-TB (82% vs. 43%), while for patients in Phase II continuation (>T6), the data show the proportion of patients declared cured is 29 percentage points higher among patients with TB-DS than among those with DR-TB (92% vs. 63%, 4). In terms of treatment success and belonging to one of the vulnerable groups, it can be observed that the highest cure rate is recorded in rural patients, and the structure is similar to the one described previously [3]. Considering rural patients, the data show that the proportion of cured patients with TB-DS is 22 percentage points higher than that of TB-DR \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Treatment Phase**} & \\ \cline{3-8}  & **TB (1–6 TB-DS, 7–8 TB-DR)** & **(T0–T2)** & **(T3–T6)** & **(>T6)** & **N/A** & **Total** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{**TB-DR** **(N1 = 217)**} & **N** & **2434** & **1468** & **177** & **25** & **4104** \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Lost to follow-up & 3.8\% & 2.7\% & 2.0\% & 3.2\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Continuous treatment & 42.7\% & 35.1\% & 26.5\% & 37.8\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & **Treatment evaluation** & Death & 10.7\% & 16.2\% & 8.2\% & 11.1\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Treatment failed & & 2.7\% & & 0.5\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Treatment completed & 7.6\% & 10.8\% & 8.2\% & 8.3\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Cured & 35.1\% & 32.4\% & 55.1\% & 39.2\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **N1** & **131** & **37** & **49** & **217** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{**TB-DS** **(N2 = 3188)**} & **N** & Lost to follow-up & 2.3\% & 1.1\% & 1.6\% & 4.0\% & 1.9\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Continuous treatment & 28.7\% & 12.9\% & 3.9\% & 28.0\% & 22.1\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & **Treatment evaluation** & Death & 4.6\% & 3.5\% & 2.3\% & 8.0\% & 4.1\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Treatment failed & 0.3\% & 0.6\% & & & 0.4\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Treatment completed & 17.0\% & 17.5\% & 23.4\% & 12.0\% & 17.4\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & Cured & 47.1\% & 64.3\% & 68.8\% & 48.0\% & 54.1\% \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **N2** & **2303** & **1431** & **128** & **25** & **3887** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Structure of the sample of TB-DR and TB-DS patients by treatment assessment and treatment phase. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **RP** & & **DD** & & **H** & \\ \hline  & **TB-DS** & **TB-DR** & **TB-DS** & **TB-DR** & **TB-DS** & **TB-DR** \\ \hline  & **3861** & **199** & **10** & **12** & **16** & **6** \\ \hline
**Other (unspecified)** & 2.7\% & 1.5\% & & 33.3\% & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: _Cont._patients (72% vs. 50%). In H, the proportion of cured patients with TB-DS is 69%, while the proportion of cured patients with TB-DR is 33%. DD has the lowest treatment success rate, with the proportion of cured patients with curable TB being 2 percentage points lower than the proportion of cured TB-DR patients (10%, compared to 8%, 4). While the proportion of rural and homeless participants is approximately the same, the proportion of DD participants who are cured is below 5%.