Literature DB >> 24903790

Is introducing rapid culture into the diagnostic algorithm of smear-negative tuberculosis cost-effective?

N Yakhelef1, M Audibert1, F Varaine2, J Chakaya3, J Sitienei4, H Huerga5, M Bonnet5.   

Abstract

SETTING: In 2007, the World Health Organization recommended introducing rapid Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture into the diagnostic algorithm of smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis (TB).
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing a rapid non-commercial culture method (thin-layer agar), together with Löwenstein-Jensen culture to diagnose smear-negative TB at a district hospital in Kenya.
DESIGN: Outcomes (number of true TB cases treated) were obtained from a prospective study evaluating the effectiveness of a clinical and radiological algorithm (conventional) against the alternative algorithm (conventional plus M. tuberculosis culture) in 380 smear-negative TB suspects. The costs of implementing each algorithm were calculated using a 'micro-costing' or 'ingredient-based' method. We then compared the cost and effectiveness of conventional vs. culture-based algorithms and estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.
RESULTS: The costs of conventional and culture-based algorithms per smear-negative TB suspect were respectively €39.5 and €144. The costs per confirmed and treated TB case were respectively €452 and €913. The culture-based algorithm led to diagnosis and treatment of 27 more cases for an additional cost of €1477 per case.
CONCLUSION: Despite the increase in patients started on treatment thanks to culture, the relatively high cost of a culture-based algorithm will make it difficult for resource-limited countries to afford.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24903790     DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.13.0630

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Tuberc Lung Dis        ISSN: 1027-3719            Impact factor:   2.373


  6 in total

1.  Cytokine Kinetics in the First Week of Tuberculosis Therapy as a Tool to Confirm a Clinical Diagnosis and Guide Therapy.

Authors:  Alice L den Hertog; María Montero-Martín; Rachel L Saunders; Matthew Blakiston; Sandra Menting; Jeevan B Sherchand; Lovett Lawson; Olanrewaju Oladimeji; Saddiq T Abdurrahman; Luis E Cuevas; Richard M Anthony
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic algorithms including lateral-flow urine lipoarabinomannan for HIV-positive patients with symptoms of tuberculosis.

Authors:  Nadia Yakhelef; Martine Audibert; Gabriella Ferlazzo; Joseph Sitienei; Steve Wanjala; Francis Varaine; Maryline Bonnet; Helena Huerga
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  A Systematic Review of Methodological Variation in Healthcare Provider Perspective Tuberculosis Costing Papers Conducted in Low- and Middle-Income Settings, Using An Intervention-Standardised Unit Cost Typology.

Authors:  Lucy Cunnama; Gabriela B Gomez; Mariana Siapka; Ben Herzel; Jeremy Hill; Angela Kairu; Carol Levin; Dickson Okello; Willyanne DeCormier Plosky; Inés Garcia Baena; Sedona Sweeney; Anna Vassall; Edina Sinanovic
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Sputum microbiota profiles of treatment-naïve TB patients in Uganda before and during first-line therapy.

Authors:  David Patrick Kateete; Adrian Muwonge; Monica M Mbabazi; Faith Nakazzi; Fred A Katabazi; Edgar Kigozi; Willy Ssengooba; Lydia Nakiyingi; Sharon Namiiro; Alphonse Okwera; Moses L Joloba
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Costs and cost-effectiveness of Gene Xpert compared to smear microscopy for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis using real-world data from Arsi zone, Ethiopia.

Authors:  Abdene Weya Kaso; Alemayehu Hailu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Economic Analyses of Respiratory Tract Infection Diagnostics: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Simon van der Pol; Paula Rojas Garcia; Maarten J Postma; Fernando Antoñanzas Villar; Antoinette D I van Asselt
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-07-15       Impact factor: 4.981

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.