Tuberculosis Elimination Efforts in the United States in the Era of Insurance Expansion and the Affordable Care Act.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act can enhance ongoing efforts to control tuberculosis (TB) in the United States by bringing millions of currently uninsured Americans into the health-care system. However, much of the legislative and financial framework that provides essential public health services necessary for effective TB control is outside the scope of the law. We identified three key issues that will still need to be addressed after full implementation of the Affordable Care Act: (1) essential TB-related public health functions will still be needed and will remain the responsibility of federal, state, and local health departments; (2) testing and treatment for latent TB infection (LTBI) is not covered explicitly as a recommended preventive service without cost sharing or copayment; and (3) remaining uninsured populations will disproportionately include groups at high risk for TB. To improve and continue TB control efforts, it is important that all populations at risk be tested and treated for LTBI and TB; that testing and treatment services be accessible and affordable; that essential federal, state, and local public health functions be maintained; that private-sector medical/public health linkages for diagnosis and treatment be developed; and that health-care providers be trained in conducting appropriate LTBI and TB clinical care.

The health-system benefits and cost-effectiveness of using Mycobacterium tuberculosis direct nucleic acid amplification testing to diagnose tuberculosis disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The utility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis direct nucleic acid amplification testing (MTD) for pulmonary tuberculosis disease diagnosis in the United States has not been well described. METHODS: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of reported patients with suspected active pulmonary tuberculosis in 2008-2010 from Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, and Massachusetts to assess MTD use, effectiveness, health-system benefits, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Among 2140 patients in whom pulmonary tuberculosis was suspected, 799 (37%) were M. tuberculosis-culture-positive. Eighty percent (680/848) of patients having acid-fast-bacilli-smear-positive specimens had MTD performed; MTD positive-predictive value (PPV) was 98% and negative-predictive value (NPV) was 94%. Nineteen percent (240/1292) of patients having smear-negative specimens had MTD; MTD PPV was 90% and NPV was 88%. Among patients suspected of tuberculosis but not having MTD, smear PPV for lab-confirmed tuberculosis was 77% and NPV 78%. Compared with no MTD, MTD significantly decreased time to diagnosis in patients with smear-positive/MTD-positive specimens, decreased respiratory isolation for patients having smear-positive/MTD-negative/culture-negative specimens, decreased outpatient days of unnecessary tuberculosis medications, and reduced resources expended on contact investigation. While MTD generally cost more than no MTD, incremental cost savings occurred in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or homelessness to diagnose or to exclude tuberculosis, and in patients with substance abuse having smear-negative specimens to exclude tuberculosis. CONCLUSIONS: MTD improved diagnostic accuracy and timeliness and reduced unnecessary respiratory isolation, treatment, and contact investigations. It was cost saving in patients with HIV, homelessness, or substance abuse, but not in others.

Estimated costs of false laboratory diagnoses of tuberculosis in three patients.

We estimated direct medical and nonmedical costs associated with a false diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) caused by laboratory cross-contamination of Mycobacterium tuberculosis cultures in Massachusetts in 1998 and 1999. For three patients who received misdiagnoses of active TB disease on the basis of laboratory cross-contamination, the costs totaled U.S. dollars 32618. Of the total, 97% was attributed to the public sector (local and state health departments, public health hospital and laboratory, and county and state correctional facilities); 3% to the private sector (physicians, hospitals, and laboratories); and <1% to the patient. Hospitalizations and inpatient tests, procedures, and TB medications accounted for 69% of costs, and outpatient TB medications accounted for 18%. The average cost per patient was dollars 10873 (range, dollars 1033-dollars 21306). Reducing laboratory cross-contamination and quickly identifying patients with cross-contaminated cultures can prevent unnecessary and potentially dangerous treatment regimens and anguish for the patient and financial burden to the health-care system.