Eva Van Ginderdeuren1,2, Jean Bassett1, Colleen F Hanrahan3, Lillian Mutunga1, Annelies Van Rie2. 1. Witkoppen Clinic, Johannesburg, South Africa. 2. Family Medicine and Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 3. Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tuberculin skin test (TST) for guiding initiation of tuberculosis preventive therapy poses major challenges in high tuberculosis burden settings. METHODS: At a primary care clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa, 278 HIV-positive adults self-read their TST by reporting if they felt a bump (any induration) at the TST placement site. TST reading (in mm) was fast-tracked to reduce patient wait time and task-shifted to delegate tasks to lower cadre healthcare workers, and result was compared to TST reading by high cadre research staff. TST reading and placement cost to the health system and patients were estimated. Simulations of health system costs were performed for 5 countries (USA, Germany, Brazil, India, Russia) to evaluate generalizability. RESULTS: Almost all participants (269 of 278, 97%) correctly self-identified the presence or absence of any induration [sensitivity 89% (95% CI 80,95) and specificity 99.5% (95% CI 97,100)]. For detection of a positive TST (induration ≥ 5mm), sensitivity was 90% (95% CI 81,96) and specificity 99% (95% CI 97,100). TST reading agreement between low and high cadre staff was high (kappa 0.97, 95% CI 0.94, 1.00). Total TST cost was 2066 I$ (95% UI 594, 5243) per 100 patients, 87% (95% UI 53, 95) of which were patient costs. Combining fast-track and task-shifting, reduced total costs to 1736 I$ (95% UI 497, 4300) per 100 patients, with 31% (95% UI 15, 42) saving in health system costs. Combining fast-tracking, task-shifting and self-reading, lowered the TST health system costs from 16% (95% UI 8, 26) in Russia to 40% (95% UI 18, 54) in the USA. CONCLUSION: A TST strategy where only patients with any self-read induration are asked to return for fast-tracked TST reading by lower cadre healthcare workers is a promising strategy that could be effective and cost-saving, but real-life cost-effectiveness should be further examined.
BACKGROUND:Tuberculin skin test (TST) for guiding initiation of tuberculosis preventive therapy poses major challenges in high tuberculosis burden settings. METHODS: At a primary care clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa, 278 HIV-positive adults self-read their TST by reporting if they felt a bump (any induration) at the TST placement site. TST reading (in mm) was fast-tracked to reduce patient wait time and task-shifted to delegate tasks to lower cadre healthcare workers, and result was compared to TST reading by high cadre research staff. TST reading and placement cost to the health system and patients were estimated. Simulations of health system costs were performed for 5 countries (USA, Germany, Brazil, India, Russia) to evaluate generalizability. RESULTS: Almost all participants (269 of 278, 97%) correctly self-identified the presence or absence of any induration [sensitivity 89% (95% CI 80,95) and specificity 99.5% (95% CI 97,100)]. For detection of a positive TST (induration ≥ 5mm), sensitivity was 90% (95% CI 81,96) and specificity 99% (95% CI 97,100). TST reading agreement between low and high cadre staff was high (kappa 0.97, 95% CI 0.94, 1.00). Total TST cost was 2066 I$ (95% UI 594, 5243) per 100 patients, 87% (95% UI 53, 95) of which were patient costs. Combining fast-track and task-shifting, reduced total costs to 1736 I$ (95% UI 497, 4300) per 100 patients, with 31% (95% UI 15, 42) saving in health system costs. Combining fast-tracking, task-shifting and self-reading, lowered the TST health system costs from 16% (95% UI 8, 26) in Russia to 40% (95% UI 18, 54) in the USA. CONCLUSION: A TST strategy where only patients with any self-read induration are asked to return for fast-tracked TST reading by lower cadre healthcare workers is a promising strategy that could be effective and cost-saving, but real-life cost-effectiveness should be further examined.
Authors: Annie F Luetkemeyer; Edwin D Charlebois; Laura L Flores; David R Bangsberg; Steven G Deeks; Jeffrey N Martin; Diane V Havlir Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2007-01-11 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Christoph Stephan; Timo Wolf; Udo Goetsch; Oswald Bellinger; Gabriele Nisius; Gerhard Oremek; Zbigniew Rakus; René Gottschalk; Sonja Stark; Hans-Reinhard Brodt; Schlomo Staszewski Journal: AIDS Date: 2008-11-30 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Molebogeng X Rangaka; Robert J Wilkinson; Andrew Boulle; Judith R Glynn; Katherine Fielding; Gilles van Cutsem; Katalin A Wilkinson; Rene Goliath; Shaheed Mathee; Eric Goemaere; Gary Maartens Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sophie Js Pascoe; Matthew P Fox; Amy N Huber; Joshua Murphy; Mokgadi Phokojoe; Marelize Gorgens; Sydney Rosen; David Wilson; Yogan Pillay; Nicole Fraser-Hurt Journal: J Int AIDS Soc Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 5.396
Authors: Andrew D Kerkhoff; Katharina Kranzer; Taraz Samandari; Jessica Nakiyingi-Miiro; Christopher C Whalen; Anthony D Harries; Stephen D Lawn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 3.240