Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The high chances of getting latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among health care workers (HCWs) will an enormous problem in low and upper-middle-income countries.
METHOD: Search strategies were done through both national and international databases include SID, Barakat knowledge network system, Irandoc, Magiran, Iranian national library, web of science, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, OVID, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar search engine. The Persian and the English languages were used as the filter in national and international databases, respectively. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms was used to controlling comprehensive vocabulary. The search terms were conducted without time limitation till January 01, 2019.
RESULTS: The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs, based on the PPD test was 27.13% [CI95%: 18.64-37.7]. The highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs were estimated 41.4% [CI95%: 25.4-59.5] in the north, and 33.8% [CI95%: 21.1-49.3] in the west. The lowest prevalence of LTBI was evaluated 18.2% [CI95%: 3.4-58.2] in the south of Iran. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs who had work-experience more than 20 years old were estimated 20.49% [CI95%: 11-34.97]. In the PPD test, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs who had received the Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) was estimated 15% [CI95%: 3.6-47.73]. While, in the QFT, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs in non-vaccinated was estimated 25.71% [CI95%: 13.96-42.49].
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows the highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian's HCWs in the north and the west probably due to neighboring countries like Azerbaijan and Iraq, respectively. It seems that Iranian's HCWs have not received the necessary training to prevent of TB. We also found that BCG was not able to protect Iranian's HCWs from TB infections, completely.

1. Introduction

Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is an immune response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) antigens without symptoms of active tuberculosis (TB) [1]. Mtb is able to colonize inside the alveolar macrophages and finally form granuloma. Mtb is ingested by phagocytosis by resident alveolar macrophages and tissue dendritic cells (DC) [2, 3]. The immune cells contribute and the pathological mark of TB, the granuloma, is formed. In the granuloma, macrophages differentiate into epithelial cells or foamy macrophages, or fuse to form giant cells, and become surrounded by lymphocytes, fibroblasts and extracellular matrix proteins. In such conditions, the Mtb will be surviving until the granuloma fails due to immunosuppression [4, 5]. Mtb use the granuloma as they are effective at initial infection level since they recruit new macrophages to allow the spread of infection between host cells [6]. At this stage, the LTBI is formed in the patient’s body [7].

There are several reports of TB outbreaks in Iran. According to the Iranian’s ministry of health, the incidence and the prevalence of TB are high in Sistan and Baluchestan, Khorasan, Mazandaran, Guilan, West and East Azerbaijan, Ardabil, Kurdistan, Khuzestan and southern coasts. Conversely, the incidence and the prevalence of TB are low in the central parts of Iran. The highest incidence and prevalence of TB belong to Golestan and Sistan-Baluchistan [8].

The risk of tuberculosis in health care workers (HCWs) is estimated to be twice as high in the general population, in high-income countries, and five times higher than the general population in countries with a low and middle income [9, 10]. In addition, one of the challenges in many countries is the transfer of tuberculosis from patients admitted to the hospital to HCWs [10]. Most importantly, the transfer of resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains from admitted patients to HCWs has increased the importance of the subject [11].

According to the findings, direct exposure to HCWs in patients with tuberculosis, direct contact with phlegm specimens and blood products of suspected tuberculosis patients, and long hours of work in high-risk places increases the risk of tuberculosis infection [12, 13]. This means that direct contact is one of the most important and worrisome factor in the transmission of tuberculosis to HCWs [10–12, 14]. Work experience, age [15], occupational status [16], the use of personal protective equipment, ventilation [17], hospital infection control unit and infection control in isolation rooms can affect LTBI outbreaks in HCWs [9-12]. To diagnose LTBI, the mantoux tuberculin skin test (TST) and QuantiFERON-TB Gold (QFT) are used [18]. Studies have shown that QFT has a higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting LTBI [19, 20]. However, some researchers believe that QFT is not superior to TST in detecting LTBI [21-23].

The early detection of LTBI in controlling, treating and preventing Mtb is a key element in patients who preventive treatment can reduce the risk of active tuberculosis in patients by up to 90% [24]. So far, systematic review and meta-analysis has not been conducted to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs. In Iran, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) do not control the Mtb as a regular program, however, reports of LTBI outbreaks in HCWs attracts a high controversy [25]. Due to the highest level of evidence and an essential role in evidence-based decision-making of meta-analysis studies [26, 27]. This study estimated the prevalence and risk factors of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs which can have vital information for policy-makers and planning at the country level.

2. Methods

2.1. Study protocol

This is the first study that was conducted based on the meta-analysis of observational studies according to epidemiology guidelines [27], and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement (S1 File) [28]. The study was achieved based on five steps; design and search strategy; collecting original articles; evaluating inclusion and exclusion criteria, and finally qualitative evaluation and statistical analysis of data. Two independent researchers (MH.YK & A.J) evaluated the data. The disagreements were solved by consensus between the team and a Bacteriologist (H.S.E). The review protocol was registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/) Identifier: CRD42018117682 [29, 30] (S2 File).

2.2. Search strategy

In order to maximize its sensitivity, search strategy was lead through Persian (national) databases, include scientific information database (http://www.sid.ir), Barakat knowledge network system (http://health.barakatkns.com), Iranian research institute for information science and technology (https://irandoc.ac.ir), MagIran (http://www.magiran.com), Iranian national library (http://www.nlai.ir/). The international databases, including web of science, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, OVID, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), and Google Scholar search engine. The Persian and the English languages were used as the filter in national and international databases, respectively. The search terms were adapted to international databases. To search a combination of words, Boolean operators (AND & OR) were used. Searching was done through medical subject heading (MeSH) terms. The search terms were conducted without any time limitation till January 01, 2019. The authors independently analyzed the manuscript contained in the title and abstract. For instance, PubMed search formula was provided in the appendix.

2.3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

2.3.1. Inclusion criteria based on PICO (related to evidence-based medicine) [31, 32]

Inclusion criteria were determined based on PICO model. In this study, population was the population of Iranian’s HCWs who were residents in the geographic regions of Northern, Southern, Eastern, Western of Iran. Comparison was conducted on a population of HCWs who did not have signs of active TB disease and did not feel illness. Outcome was the overall prevalence of LTBI infection among Iranian’s HCWs.

2.3.2. Exclusion criteria

In this study, review articles, letters, editorial, case reports, conference papers, and comments were excluded. The studies which did not have a focus on the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs, duplicated papers, non-English full papers, non-Persian full papers, and non-accessible full-text papers were excluded. Likewise, the populations other than Iranian’s HCWs were excluded.

2.4. Latent TB detection criteria

2.4.1. The Mantoux tuberculin skin test (TST)

To the Mantoux tuberculin skin test (TST), purified protein derivative (0.1 Ml) is used [33-35], and the induration at TST site is measured 72 hours later. TST reaction of ≥ 5 mm of induration is classified as negative but is considered as positive in patients receiving corticosteroid or patients with Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS), diabetes mellitus, lymphoma, and leukemia. The induration of ≥10 mm is classified positive in; recent immigrants (< 5 years) from high-prevalence countries; residents and employees of high-risk congregate settings; mycobacteriology laboratory personnel; persons with clinical conditions that place them at high risk. The induration of ≥15 mm is considered positive in any person, including persons with no known risk factors for TB. Two-step testing methods were used for health care workers and nursing home residents [33-35].

2.4.2. Interferon-gamma release assays

Interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) show how the immune system reacts to the Mycobacteria that cause TB [36]. The IGRA has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Positive IGRA means that the person has been infected with TB bacteria. Negative IGRA means that the person’s blood did not react to the test and that latent TB infection or TB disease is not likely. IGRA is the preferred method of TB infection testing for people who have received the Bacille Calmette–Guérin (BCG) [30, 36–39].

2.5. Selection of studies

During the selection stage, duplicated studies were removed by the EndNote™ software Ver. X9 (Clarivate Analytics company). In the skimming and screening stage, co-authors, journals, and publishing years were evaluated by two experts based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (the eligibility stage), independently. The disagreements between the two were resolved through an expert bacteriologist (Fig 1).

Fig 1

A flow diagram following the PRISMA (depicted by MH-YK).

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Iterns for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097 For more information, visit www.prisma-statement.org.

2.6. Quality appraisal

In this stage, the irrelevant studies were excluded, and then the quality of each study was evaluated. To quality appraisal, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist (S3 File) [40] was applied which is determined the quality of these studies based on three levels of scoring. The score of five or less defined a poor quality study; the score of five or six distinguished as the medium quality study, and the score of seven or eight determined as the high-quality study. Finally, the medium to high-quality studies were included in the data analysis (Fig 1).

2.7. Data extraction

The enter terms were author’s names, province, geographical regions, year of publishing, sample size, age, gender, history of BCG, history of exposure with tuberculosis, history of tuberculosis disease, laboratory diagnosis tests, job experience, duration of employment, workplaces, single-step or two-step TST, and history of hospitalization. The author’s name, institution, and the journal name were blinded, and then data was extracted through two researchers (MH.YK & A.J), independently. Only if necessary, the additional information/raw data was collected by phone call, mailing or fax.

2.8. Statistical analysis

The prevalence of LTBI in HCWs was considered as a binomial distribution probability, and the variance was calculated by a binomial distribution. To evaluate its heterogeneity, the Cochran test (Q) and I2 index were used [1, 41, 42]. The subgroup analysis was performed based on province, single-step or two-step TST, laboratory diagnosis tests, job, gender, history of TB disease, history of TB exposure, history of BCG, and geographical region. Sensitivity analysis was also achieved to evaluate the impact of each study, based on the results of the overall prevalence of LTBI in Iranian HCWs. The Begg's test and Egger's test were carried out using a funnel plot to examine publication bias. Data analysis was examined by the comprehensive meta-analysis (Ver. 2 Englewood, NJ 07631, USA), and the level of significance was considered as p<0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Study characteristics and methodological quality

In the primary search of study, 421 studies were found. After skimming and screening, 20 (4.75%) studies were eligible according to inclusions and exclusions criteria [43-62]. The total sample size was calculated 6453 Iranian’s HCWs (Fig 1) (S1 Table).

3.2. The overall prevalence LTBI in HCWs

The prevalence of LTBI in HCWs, based on the PPD test (48 hours) was 27.13% [CI95%: 18.64–37.7] (Fig 2), and based on the QFT test was 16.92% [CI95%: 9.7–27.84] (Fig 3). The prevalence of LTBI was estimated 12.11% [CI95%: 4.53–28.57] in Iranian’s HCWs who had negative TST reaction (48 hours) in the first week (Fig 4). The prevalence of induration at TST site (48 h) was estimated <4 mm in 43.74% [CI 95%: 28.19–60.63], 5–9 mm in 17.52% [CI 95%: 9.73–29.5], 10–15 mm in 14.55% [CI 95%: 8.87–22.93] and >15 mm in 13.4% [CI 95%: 8.59–20.31] (S1 Fig).

Fig 2

The prevalence subgroup analysis based on TST/PPD induration diameter (48 hrs.) in Iranian’s HCWs with LTBI (forest plot-random effect model).

Fig 3

The prevalence subgroup analysis based on QFT in Iranian’s HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

Fig 4

The prevalence subgroup analysis based on TST/PPD induration diameter after one week in Iranian’s HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

3.3. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian HCWs based on geographical region of Iran

The highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs was estimated 41.4% [CL95%: 25.4–59.5] in the north, and 33.8% [CI95%: 21.1–49.3] in the west of Iran. The lowest prevalence of LTBI was found 18.2% [CI95%: 3.4–58.2] in the south of Iran. These results showed a significant relationship between LTBI prevalence in Iranian’s HCWs and the geographic location in Iran (p <0.0001) (S2 Fig) (Fig 5).

Fig 5

Demonstrating LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs based on geographical classification (random effect model).

3.4. Sensitivity analysis and cumulative meta-analysis

Sensitivity analysis of prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs was estimated with a 95% confidence interval. It showed that there is no significant effect on the overall prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs (Fig 6). The overall prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs based on the publication year was estimated by cumulative meta-analysis and represented in (S3 Fig). The sub group analysis of the quality of studies was showed in (S4 Fig).

Fig 6

Sensitivity analysis to prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs (one study removed test).

3.5. Meta-regression

Base on the PPD (48 hours) results, the prevalence of publishing manuscripts about identification of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs has decreased in Iran. There was no significant relationship between publishing years. (Mixed effects regression (Method of moments); Slope = -0.1898(SE = 0.068, (95% CI: -0.323– -0.056)), Intercept = 381.14 (SE = 137.43, (95% CI: 111.78–650.5)), P = 0.10653) (Fig 7).

Fig 7

Meta-regression of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs according to publishing year of studies (method of moments).

3.6. The prevalence of LTBI in HCWs based on term of employment

Base on the PPD results, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with more than 10 years old work-experience was evaluated 51%. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with less than 10 years old work-experience was estimated at 29.30%.

Base on the QFT results, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with more than 20 years old work-experience was calculated 20.49% [CI95%: 11–34.97], which showed a significant relationship between the duration of employment (P <0.0001) (S5 Fig).

3.7. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian HCWs based on occupation and wards

Base on the PPD results, the prevalence of LTBI in assistant nurses was estimated 45.76% [CI 95%: 33.51–58.55], in physicians was estimated 44.99% [CI95%: 33.37–57.17], in ward nurses was calculated 39.4% [CI95%: 17.63–66.39], and in service workers was estimated 36.43% [CI95%: 19.51–57.53]. Base on the QFT results, the prevalence of LTBI in both nurses and TB service workers was higher than other occupations (Fig 8).

Fig 8

The prevalence subgroup analysis of occupational based on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in Iranian’s HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

The prevalence of LTBI in the infectious ward was estimated 52.09% [CI95%: 43.92–60.14], and in the internal ward was evaluated 50% [CI95%: 34.22–65.78]. The lowest prevalence of LTBI was estimated in the infectious wards based on QFT. There was a significant relationship between the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs, and hospital wards (p <0.0001) (Fig 9).

Fig 9

The prevalence subgroup analysis of ward based on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in Iranian’s HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

3.8. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs based on gender and age

The prevalence of LTBI was estimated at 42.16% [CI95%: 26.41–59.69] in male Iranian’s HCWs based on the PPD test. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs and type of gender based on PPD test (P<0.051). In QFT, however, a significant relationship was showed between the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs, and the gender (P <0.0001) (S6 Fig).

The highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs who were more than 40 years old was estimated 44% [CI 95%: 26.47–63.16] in the PPD test.

The highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs aged 30 years old was estimated 22.52% [CI95%: 3.7–68.34] in the QFT. In both PPD test and QFT, it was evaluated that there was significant relationship between the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs, and age of HCWs (P<0.0001) (S7 Fig).

3.9. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs based on the history of tuberculosis contact and the tuberculosis clinical symptoms

The results showed that 30.15% [CI 95%: 11–60.13] of Iranian’s HCWs directly contacted to patients with tuberculosis. The results also showed that 6.9% [CI 95%: 2.36–18.55] of Iranian’s HCWs had active tuberculosis symptoms (S8 and S9 Figs).

3.10. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs based on the “BCG”

The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs who received the BCG was estimated 15% [CI 95%: 3.6–47.73] based on the PPD test. While the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs who did not receive the BCG was estimated at 25.71% [CI95%: 13.96–42.49] based on the QFT. In both PPD, and QFT, there was a significant relationship between those who did and those who did not receive the vaccine (P<0.0001) (S10 Fig).

3.11. Publication bias

The publication bias in this study was evaluated by Begg's and Egger's tests. The publication bias by Begg's test was calculated 0.06, and the Egger's test was calculated 0.028. The probability of the publication bias in this study was significant (S11 Fig).

4. Discussion

This study is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of LTBI outbreak been carried out in Iranian’s HCWs. According to results of the current meta-analysis, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs is estimated at 27.1% [1]. Among the low and middle-income countries, the prevalence of LTBI in Kenya [63], Zimbabwe [64], Russia [65], Brazil [66], Vietnam [67], Rwanda [68], China [69] and South Africa [70] has been higher than in Iran [1]. The prevalence of LTBI in HCWs of Italy [71], Norway [72] and India [73] is reported to be equal to or less than Iran. Iran is a TB endemic country [25] and the treatment of LTBI is usually done by using a single medicine and only in high risk groups [74]. While in high-income countries, screening of pulmonary and lab staffs is recommended annually [75]. Also, it could be seen that training of Iranian’s HCWs is not sufficient to prevent tuberculosis [25].

According to the results of meta-analysis, the lowest prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs was in southern Iran (18.2%). The highest prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs was reported in northern and western Iran. The high prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs may be due to neighboring Azerbaijan and Iraq [76]. Azerbaijan which is listed on the high burden countries has high prevalence of multidrug resistance MTB [76-78]. In fact, the northern neighbors of Iran, such as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, are among the high burden countries with a high prevalence of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis [80]. On the other hand, the name of the country's western neighbor of Iran–Iraq is not listed on the high burden countries [76-78] but according to reports from Ministry of Health—Iran Center for Medical Education and Treatment, Infectious Disease Control Center- the Iraqi state may have become a high-risk source for tuberculosis after undergoing its recent crisis [79, 80].

The current study showed that 15.5% of the Iranian’s HCWs had used before the BCG with at least a positive PPD test. According to studies, BCG does not protect adults from getting infected with tuberculosis, so the positive results of tuberculin testing in people vaccinated with BCG will be considered as a latent infection [81]. In other words, previous vaccination with BCG prevents tuberculin testing [82]. This may be due to a false positive reaction in PPD [25]. Iranian’s HCWs may respond to skin tests without being infected with mycobacterium [83]. The reason for these false-positive reactions may be due to contamination with non-tuberculosis mycobacterium, previous BCG, poor test performance or inappropriate interpretation of the test [83].

5. Limitations

Information about this meta-analysis was extracted from data published in Iranian databases as there was no access to the actual information of the control center of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education, so the exact prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs could not be calculated. Selection bias is able to limit the generalization of these findings because the type of bacteria strains in a country could be different with the other countries and could be related to descent diversities.

On the other hands, patients may not respond to skin test tuberculosis, even if they are infected with Mycobacterium. It may be due to skin allergies, recent infections (recent contact for 8 to 10 weeks), chronic infection, recent vaccinations with live viruses, advanced tuberculosis, some viral diseases (measles and bile), misdiagnosis skin or incorrect interpretation of the reaction. Patients may also respond to skin tests, even without being infected with Mycobacterium. The reason for these reactions may be due to contamination with non-tuberculosis Mycobacterium, previous BCG, inappropriate test run or inappropriate interpretation of the test.

Despite the fact that the CDC updates the guidelines for the prevention and transmission of M. tuberculosis in health-care settings annually, the protocol for among Iranian’s HCWs has not yet been prepared. Also, workshops could be developed to train tuberculosis prevention and self-care among Iranian’s HCWs in the western regions.

National databases are not sensitive to operators “AND” and “OR” to search for the combinations. Also, some databases were not fully accessible because of using Guilan University of Medical Sciences’—Iran Ministry of Health & Medical Education- VPN.

6. Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed the prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs and estimated at 27.1%. The prevalence of LTBI between HCWs of Italy, Norway and India is reported to be equal to or less than Iranian’s HCWs. On the other hand, the highest prevalence of LTBI among Iranian’s HCWs in the north and the west of Iran may due to neighboring with Azerbaijan and Iraq which has become a high-risk source for tuberculosis by overcoming its recent years of crisis. Meanwhile, it could be seen that training of Iranian’s HCWs is not sufficient to prevent tuberculosis. We also found that BCG was not able to protect Iranian’s HCWs from TB infectious, completely.

PRISMA checklist.

(DOC)

Click here for additional data file.

The review protocol which has been registered in PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Newcastle-Ottawa scale checklist.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Data characteristics (full details) (Microsoft excel).

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of TST/PPD induration diameter (48 hrs.) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of TST/PPD induration diameter (48 hrs.) in HCWs with LTBI base on geographical region (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Cumulative meta-analysis for overall prevalence of LTBI in HCWs.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The sub group analysis of the quality of studies.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis to employment duration base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of gender base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of age base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of history TB contact base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of TB clinical symptoms base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

The prevalence subgroup analysis of BCG base on PPD (A), and QFT (B) in HCWs with LTBI (forest plot—Random effect model).

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Publication bias of studies included due to the aim of prevalence of HCWs with LTBI.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

30 Aug 2019

[EXSCINDED]

PONE-D-19-18112

Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jafari,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Oct 14 2019 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

HASNAIN SEYED EHTESHAM

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Major Revision

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. We note that Figure 5 in your submission contain a map image which may be copyrighted.

All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (a) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (b) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure  to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). This study is aimed at conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence and incidence of LTBI in Iranian HCWs. English throughout the manuscript is flawed and makes it a difficult read. However authors have done meticulous meta-analysis. Portions which require correction have been highlighted in yellow in the attached pdf.

The whole manuscript needs to be revamped majorly and revised then based on scientific criteria.

Specific comments are given below

1. Abstract: Background section line 28 “changed” does not make any sense

2. Was there any period from when studies were collected?

3. Line 64, provide the range of prevalence in other reports

4. Line 69, change “transfer” to “spread”

5. Mention the number of low, medium and high quality studies

6. Line 190, “it was considered significant at p<0.05

7. Line 234-239 not clear

8. Line 276, add p value

9. Line 308, rephrase

10. Did the prevalence estimates correlate to WHO incidence rates?

11. Legends for all figures need to be improved with the aim of giving correct aim of the experiment and its analysis

12. Line 263 says “there was no significant relationship” and then gives p<0.0001 which is contradictory

13. What kind of studies have been included cohort/cross sectional/ case studies?

14. In methodology section, which software package was used for sensitivity test?

15. It is suggested that a more critical account be provided in the discussion section taking into account salient findings, problems and gaps

16. Check the entire MS for repetitions

Reviewer #2: The meta-analysis performed in the manuscript shows the highest prevalence of Latent TB infection in health care workers in the north and the west of Iran due to neighboring countries like Azerbaijan and Iraq, respectively. Hence, there is a need to create awareness in Iranian HCWs about isolation and personal protection.

however the study handled a very serious issue but following points need to be addressed

1. Please follow the proper PRISMA template and not a Venn Diagram

2. What is the basis of sensitivity analysis is not clear. What is the rationale for removing that one study?

3. The S2 figure is more important than the Figure 5 with map. Maybe the map can go in supplementary

4 As they say national databases are not sensitive to Boolean operators, do the authors think this affects the search? Does this mean it is not an exhaustive search on this topic?

5. Doing a sensitivity analysis based on the quality of study will also add value.

6. The search strategy provided by the authors is very very broad. They do not include the tests, they do not include different terms for HCWs, eg: T-SPOT, community workers, TST etc. I do not feel this is a complete and detailed search.

7. Was data extracted for both one-step and two-step TST? If so, doing that analysis is also important. The authors say they did it but is not available.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Submitted filename: PONE-D-19-18112_reviewer.pdf

Click here for additional data file.

15 Sep 2019

Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Manuscript ID: PONE-D-19-18112

Editor Recommendations:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

Comment: It was checked.

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

Comment: The English language, spelling, and grammar of manuscript was rechecked by Dr. Farahnaz Movahedzadeh as a Research Assistance Professor of UIC.

3. We note that Figure 5 in your submission contain a map image which may be copyrighted.

Comment: The map image which we used in this manuscript depicted by authors and we didn’t copy from other sources. we are ready to change map if you want.

Reviewer #1 recommendations:

Health care workers (HCWs) are at ‎increased risk of latent tuberculosis infection ‎‎(LTBI). This study is aimed at conducting a ‎systematic review and meta-analysis of the ‎prevalence and incidence of LTBI in Iranian ‎HCWs. English throughout the manuscript is ‎flawed and makes it a difficult read. However, ‎authors have done meticulous meta-analysis. ‎Portions which require correction have been ‎highlighted in yellow in the attached pdf. The whole manuscript needs to be revamped ‎majorly and revised then based on scientific ‎criteria.

Comment: Background section line 28 ‎‎“changed” does not make any sense.

Response: The background section line 28 was improved to “The high chances of getting latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among health care workers (HCWs) will an enormous problem in low and upper-middle-income countries.”

Comment: Was there any period from when studies ‎were collected?

‎Response: Absolutely yes. The time interval of this study was without any time limitation till January 01, 2019.

Comment: Line 64, provide the range of prevalence in ‎other reports

‎Response: It was improved to “There are several reports of TB outbreaks in Iran. According to the Iranian’s ministry of health, the incidence and the prevalence of TB are high in Sistan and Baluchestan, Khorasan, Mazandaran, Guilan, West and East Azerbaijan, Ardabil, Kurdistan, Khuzestan and southern coasts. Conversely, the incidence and the prevalence of TB are low in the central parts of Iran. The highest incidence and prevalence of TB belong to Golestan and Sistan-Baluchistan.”

Comment: Line 69, change “transfer” to “spread”

‎Response: It was done.

Comment: Mention the number of low, medium and ‎high quality studies

‎Response: The quality scores of studies were mentioned in Table S1.

Comment: Line 190, “it was considered significant at ‎p<0.05

‎Response: It was done.

Comment: Line 234-239 not clear

‎Response: It was improved to ” In the PPD test, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with more than 10 years old work-experience was evaluated 51%. The prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with less than 10 years old work-experience was estimated at 29.30%. In the QFT test, the prevalence of LTBI in Iranian’s HCWs with more than 20 years old work-experience was calculated 20.49% [CI95%: 11-34.97], which showed a significant relationship between the duration of employment (P <0.0001) (S4 Fig)”.

Comment: Line 276, add p value

‎Response: It was done.

Comment: Line 308, rephrase

‎Response: It was done.

Comment: Did the prevalence estimates correlate to ‎WHO incidence rates?

‎Response: In this study, we just estimated the prevalence of LTBI among Iranian HCWs, not the incidence.

Comment: Legends for all figures need to be ‎improved with the aim of giving correct aim of ‎the experiment and its analysis

‎Response: It was done.

Comment: Line 263 says “there was no significant ‎relationship” and then gives p<0.0001 which is ‎contradictory

‎Response: It was improved to “The highest prevalence of LTBI in Iranian HCWs aged 30 years old was estimated 22.52% [CI95 %: 3.7-68.34] in the QFT. In both PPD test and QFT, it was evaluated that there was significant relationship between the prevalence of LTBI in HCWs, and age of HCWs (P<0.0001) (S6 Fig).”

Comment: What kind of studies have been included ‎cohort/cross sectional/ case studies?

‎Response: The cross sectional and cohort studies have been included.

Comment: In methodology section, which software ‎package was used for sensitivity test?

‎Response: Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Ver 2 , Englewood, NJ 07631, USA)‏.

Comment: It is suggested that a more critical account ‎be provided in the discussion section taking ‎into account salient findings, problems and ‎gaps

‎Response: In light of the evidence, we preferred to focus more on the prevalence of LTBI among HCWs in the eastern provinces of Iran, specially provinces which neighbor of Iraq.

Comment: Check the entire MS for repetitions

‎Response: It was done.

Reviewer #2 recommendations:

The meta-analysis performed in ‎the manuscript shows the highest prevalence ‎of Latent TB infection in health care workers in ‎the north and the west of Iran due to ‎neighboring countries like Azerbaijan and Iraq, ‎respectively. Hence, there is a need to create ‎awareness in Iranian HCWs about isolation and ‎personal protection. However, the study handled a very serious issue ‎but following points need to be addressed

‎ Comment: Please follow the proper PRISMA template ‎and not a Venn Diagram

‎Response: It was done.

‎ Comment: What is the basis of sensitivity analysis is ‎not clear. What is the rationale for removing ‎that one study?

‎‎Response: According to the Cochrane hand book, by creating a given set of variables, an analyst can determine how changes in one variable affect the outcome. In other words, Sensitivity analysis is a method for predicting the outcome of a decision if a situation turns out to be different compared to the key predictions. It helps in assessing the riskiness of a strategy. Helps in identifying how dependent the output is on a particular input value.

https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_9/9_7_sensitivity_analyses.htm

It used a lot in other same meta-analysis which is published.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871402119303960

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214738

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0164769

http://ijn.mums.ac.ir/article_13419.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30573555

Comment: The S2 figure is more important than the ‎Figure 5 with map. Maybe the map can go in ‎supplementary

‎‎Response: We appreciate your valuable comment, but we believe that the map could be more clearer and it could convey the author's intent to the readers.

Comment: As they say national databases are not ‎sensitive to Boolean operators, do the authors ‎think this affects the search? Does this mean it ‎is not an exhaustive search on this topic?

‎Response: Thank you for your attention. In national databases, the SID is ‎ just sensitive to Boolean operators. So, we searched other Persian national databases (Barakat knowledge network system; Irandoc, Magiran, and Iranian national library) through manual ways.

Comment: Doing a sensitivity analysis based on the ‎quality of study will also add value.

‎‎Response: The sub group analysis of the ‎quality of studies was showed in (S4 Fig).

Comment: The search strategy provided by the authors ‎is very broad. They do not include the ‎tests, they do not include different terms for ‎HCWs, eg: T-SPOT, community workers, TST ‎etc. I do not feel this is a complete and ‎detailed search.

Response: Thanks to your valuable comment. To including of different terms of LTBI in Iranian ‘s HCWs. we searched more synonymous of keywords in the national databases.

Comment: Was data extracted for both one-step and ‎two-step TST? If so, doing that analysis is also ‎important. The authors say they did it but is not ‎available. ‎

‎ Response: As shown in Table S1, only two studies extracted one-step and two-step TST data that could not be analyzed.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

19 Sep 2019

Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PONE-D-19-18112R1

Dear Dr. Jafari,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

HASNAIN SEYED EHTESHAM

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

The Authors have very comprehensively revised the manuscript addressing every single issue raised by the 2 Reviewers. The important issues such as performing a sensitivity analysis and other issues have now been take care.

I recommend publication of this manuscript.

Reviewers' comments:

24 Sep 2019

PONE-D-19-18112R1

Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Dear Dr. Jafari:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof HASNAIN SEYED EHTESHAM

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE