There is a suggestion that drug resistance rates decreased in developi
ng countries over the period 1962-85, while recent data suggest that r
esistance may be increasing. The initial decrease in resistance appear
s to be associated with well-functioning National Tuberculosis Control
Programmes (NTP), while the recently observed increase may be due eit
her to understaffed, resource-poor programmes or to the effect of the
HIV epidemic, or to both. It is possible that the HIV epidemic may ove
rwhelm the NTP, resulting in decreased programme efficiency and ultima
tely increased drug resistance. Resistance surveillance appears to be
a good measure of programme efficiency. For research purposes, primary
drug resistance surveys should be done on a sample of relevant patien
ts which includes and distinguishes between HIV-positive and HIV-negat
ive patients. At this time, there is not enough information to warrant
a recommendation regarding HIV testing of TB patients for surveillanc
e purposes. In order for resistance surveys to be relevant from the pu
blic health perspective, one must know the proportion of patients pres
enting for treatment having previously received treatment. The meaning
ful denominator for drug resistance surveys from the programme evaluat
ion perspective should be the number of patients presenting for treatm
ent. For initial drug resistance surveys the measurement should be the
number of people never having received prior TB treatment with resist
ant bacilli, divided by the number of new patients presenting for trea
tment. For acquired resistance, one should look at all patients who be
gin treatment with susceptible bacilli who become resistant 6 months l
ater.