Cost analysis for patients with presumed pulmonary tuberculosis attended in the public health system of rio de janeiro, Brazil.

Background: In last years, few attention has given to the patient's prediagnostic costs when evaluating the introduction of new technologies for tuberculosis (TB) and in this context, this study evaluated patient's costs and cost-effectiveness incurred with TB diagnosis comparing BactecTMMGITTM960 system (MGIT) to the Löwestein-Jensen (LJ) culture in a health center and in a university hospital, in Rio de Janeiro City, Brazil. Methods: Patient's mean costs were evaluated during the diagnosis process and cost-effectiveness based on mean time in days for the adoption of appropriate clinical anti-TB treatment in two health units comparing culture by means LJ and MGIT. Results: The mean cost of LJ and MGIT in the health center was U. S. dollars (US$) 26.6 and US$ 45.13, respectively, and in university hospital was US$ 206.87 and US$ 285.48, respectively. Comparing the two approaches for TB diagnosis incurred by the patients, the incremental cost-effectiveness of MGIT compared to LJ was US$ 0.88 and US$ 4.03 per patient, respectively, to reduce the average time to adopt appropriate treatment. Conclusions: The culture method directly impacts patient costs while waiting for the correct diagnosis and contributing to aggravating costs with patients with TB.

The activity-based cost of drug-susceptibility test of Mycobacterium tuberculosis through Kit SIRE Nitratase® Plastlabor.

Background: Drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) is an ongoing health threat, and the greatest challenge to adequate control of TB in many countries lies in the lack of proper laboratory drug-susceptibility test. The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity-based costs (ABC) of Kit SIRE Nitratase® (Kit SIRE) and compare its values with the conventional drug-susceptibility test. Methods: The ABC was calculated for three different approaches: Kit SIRE (clinical samples and cultures), proportion methods in Lowenstein Jensen (PM-LJ), and the Bactec™ MGIT™ 960 system based on Mycobacterial Research Laboratory's routine. Results: The ABC of Kit SIRE from cultures was US$ 148.54, while from clinical samples was US$ 136.12. In the case of conventional tests, the ABC of Bactec™ MGIT™ 960 was US$ 227.63 and of the PM-LJ was US$ 132.64. The Kit SIRE has a lower ABC when clinical samples are used instead of cultures. Compared to conventional tests, the ABC is similar to the PM-LJ and lower the Bactec™ MGIT™ 960. Conclusion: The Kit SIRE should be used as a screening method in clinical specimens and in culture for laboratories that do not have Bactec™ MGIT™ 960. Therefore, it can be incorporated into the routine of laboratories in countries with low resources and a high burden of TB and drug-resistant TB.