SETTING: Urban health clinic, Nairobi. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on tuberculosis (TB) case detection and laboratory workload of reducing the number of sputum smears examined and thresholds for diagnosing positive smears and positive cases. DESIGN: In this prospective study, three Ziehl-Neelsen stained sputum smears from consecutive pulmonary TB suspects were examined blind. The standard approach (A), > or = 2 positive smears out of 3, using a cut-off of 10 acid-fast bacilli (AFB)/100 high-power fields (HPF), was compared with approaches B, > or = 2 positive smears (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3, one of which is > or = 10 AFB/100 HPF; C, > or = 2 positive smears (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3; D, > or = 1 positive smear (> or = 10 AFB/100 HPF) out of 2; and E, > or = 1 positive smear (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 2. The microscopy gold standard was detection of at least one positive smear (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3. RESULTS: Among 644 TB suspects, the alternative approaches detected from 114 (17.7%) (approach B) to 123 cases (19.1%) (approach E) compared to 105 cases (16.3%) for approach A (P < 0.005). Sensitivity ranged between 82.0% (105/128) for A and 96.1% (123/128) for E. The single positive smear approaches reduced the number of smears by 36% compared to approach A. CONCLUSION: Reducing the number of specimens and the positivity threshold to define a positive case increased the sensitivity of microscopy and reduced laboratory workload.
SETTING: Urban health clinic, Nairobi. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on tuberculosis (TB) case detection and laboratory workload of reducing the number of sputum smears examined and thresholds for diagnosing positive smears and positive cases. DESIGN: In this prospective study, three Ziehl-Neelsen stained sputum smears from consecutive pulmonary TB suspects were examined blind. The standard approach (A), > or = 2 positive smears out of 3, using a cut-off of 10 acid-fast bacilli (AFB)/100 high-power fields (HPF), was compared with approaches B, > or = 2 positive smears (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3, one of which is > or = 10 AFB/100 HPF; C, > or = 2 positive smears (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3; D, > or = 1 positive smear (> or = 10 AFB/100 HPF) out of 2; and E, > or = 1 positive smear (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 2. The microscopy gold standard was detection of at least one positive smear (> or = 4 AFB/100 HPF) out of 3. RESULTS: Among 644 TB suspects, the alternative approaches detected from 114 (17.7%) (approach B) to 123 cases (19.1%) (approach E) compared to 105 cases (16.3%) for approach A (P < 0.005). Sensitivity ranged between 82.0% (105/128) for A and 96.1% (123/128) for E. The single positive smear approaches reduced the number of smears by 36% compared to approach A. CONCLUSION: Reducing the number of specimens and the positivity threshold to define a positive case increased the sensitivity of microscopy and reduced laboratory workload.
Authors: Linda M Parsons; Akos Somoskövi; Cristina Gutierrez; Evan Lee; C N Paramasivan; Alash'le Abimiku; Steven Spector; Giorgio Roscigno; John Nkengasong Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 26.132
Authors: J Lucian Davis; William Worodria; Harriet Kisembo; John Z Metcalfe; Adithya Cattamanchi; Michael Kawooya; Rachel Kyeyune; Saskia den Boon; Krista Powell; Richard Okello; Samuel Yoo; Laurence Huang Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Penelope Miremba; Joan N Kalyango; William Worodria; Henry Mugerwa; Ethel Nakakawa; Benon B Asiimwe Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-10-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ibrahim Sendagire; Maarten Schim Van der Loeff; Mesach Mubiru; Joseph Konde-Lule; Frank Cobelens Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-12-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Edine W Tiemersma; Marieke J van der Werf; Martien W Borgdorff; Brian G Williams; Nico J D Nagelkerke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maryline Bonnet; Laramie Gagnidze; Willie Githui; Philippe Jean Guérin; Laurence Bonte; Francis Varaine; Andrew Ramsay Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-02-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrew Ramsay; Luis E Cuevas; Catherine J F Mundy; Carl-Michael Nathanson; Petros Chirambo; Russell Dacombe; S Bertel Squire; Felix M L Salaniponi; Sera Munthali Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-11-10 Impact factor: 3.240