Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 23(1): 341, 2023 May 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37217868

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) using molecular tests, such as Xpert MTB/RIF (MTB/RIF) or Xpert Ultra (Ultra). These tests are expensive and resource-consuming, and cost-effective approaches are needed for greater coverage. METHODS: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pooling sputum samples for TB testing by using a fixed amount of 1,000 MTB/RIF or Ultra cartridges. We used the number of people with TB detected as the indicator for cost-effectiveness. Cost-minimization analysis was conducted from the healthcare system perspective and included the costs to the healthcare system using pooled and individual testing. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the overall performance of the pooled testing using MTB/RIF or Ultra (sensitivity, 93.9% vs. 97.6%, specificity 98% vs. 97%, p-value > 0.1 for both). The mean unit cost across all studies to test one person was 34.10 international dollars for the individual testing and 21.95 international dollars for the pooled testing, resulting in a savings of 12.15 international dollars per test performed (35.6% decrease). The mean unit cost per bacteriologically confirmed TB case was 249.64 international dollars for the individual testing and 162.44 international dollars for the pooled testing (34.9% decrease). Cost-minimization analysis indicates savings are directly associated with the proportion of samples that are positive. If the TB prevalence is ≥ 30%, pooled testing is not cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Pooled sputum testing can be a cost-effective strategy for diagnosis of TB, resulting in significant resource savings. This approach could increase testing capacity and affordability in resource-limited settings and support increased testing towards achievement of WHO End TB strategy.


Assuntos
Antibióticos Antituberculose , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Tuberculose Pulmonar , Tuberculose , Humanos , Tuberculose Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Tuberculose Pulmonar/tratamento farmacológico , Rifampina , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/genética , Antibióticos Antituberculose/uso terapêutico , Análise de Custo-Efetividade , Escarro , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Tuberculose/diagnóstico , Tuberculose/tratamento farmacológico
2.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(3): 719-727, 2021 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33622482

RESUMO

GeneXpert-based testing with Xpert MTB/RIF or Ultra assays is essential for tuberculosis diagnosis. However, testing may be affected by cartridge and staff shortages. More efficient testing strategies could help, especially during the coronavirus disease pandemic. We searched the literature to systematically review whether GeneXpert-based testing of pooled sputum samples achieves sensitivity and specificity similar to testing individual samples; this method could potentially save time and preserve the limited supply of cartridges. From 6 publications, we found 2-sample pools using Xpert MTB/RIF had 87.5% and 96.0% sensitivity (average sensitivity 94%; 95% CI 89.0%-98.0%) (2 studies). Four-sample pools averaged 91% sensitivity with Xpert MTB/RIF (2 studies) and 98% with Ultra (2 studies); combining >4 samples resulted in lower sensitivity. Two studies reported that pooling achieved 99%-100% specificity and 27%-31% in cartridge savings. Our results show that pooling may improve efficiency of GeneXpert-based testing.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/isolamento & purificação , Escarro/microbiologia , Tuberculose/diagnóstico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/genética , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Manejo de Espécimes
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA