ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The use of liquid medium (MGIT960) for tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis was recommended by WHO in 2007. However, there has been no evaluation of its effectiveness on clinically important outcomes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A pragmatic trial was carried out in a tertiary hospital and a secondary health care unit in Rio de Janeiro City, Brazil. Participants were 16 years or older, suspected of having TB. They were excluded if only cerebral spinal fluid or blood specimens were available for analysis. MGIT960 technique was compared with the Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) method for laboratory diagnosis of active TB. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had their initial medical management changed within 2 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were: mean time for changing the procedure, patient satisfaction with the overall treatment and adverse events. Data were analysed by intention-to-treat. Between April 2008 and September 2011, 693 patients were enrolled (348 to MGIT, 345 to LJ). Smear and culture results were positive for 10% and 15.7% of participants, respectively. Patients in the MGIT arm had their initial medical management changed more frequently than those in the LJ group (10.1% MGIT vs 3.8% LJ, RR 2.67 95% CI 1.44-.96, p = 0.002, NNT 16, 95% CI 10-39). Mean time for changing the initial procedure was greater in LJ group at both sites: 20.0 and 29.6 days in MGIT group and 52.2 and 64.3 in LJ group (MD 33.5, 95% CI 30.6-36.4, p = 0.0001). No other important differences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that opting for the MGIT960 system for TB diagnosis provides a promising case management model for improving the quality of care and control of TB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN79888843.
Subject(s)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis/isolation & purification , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Antitubercular Agents/therapeutic use , Bacteriological Techniques , Brazil , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Secondary Care , Tertiary Healthcare , Tuberculosis/drug therapy , Tuberculosis/microbiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
In view of the fact that the World Health Organization has recommended the use of the mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) 960 system for the diagnosis of tuberculosis and that there is as yet no evidence regarding the clinical impact of its use in health care systems, we conducted a pragmatic clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of the use of MGIT 960 at two health care facilities in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where the incidence of tuberculosis is high. Here, we summarize the methodology and preliminary results of the trial. (ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN79888843 [http://isrctn.org/]) In view of the fact that the World Health Organization has recommended the use of the mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) 960 system for the diagnosis of tuberculosis and that there is as yet no evidence regarding the clinical impact of its use in health care systems, we conducted a pragmatic clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of the use of MGIT 960 at two health care facilities in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where the incidence of tuberculosis is high. Here, we summarize the methodology and preliminary results of the trial. (ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN79888843 [http://isrctn.org/]).
Subject(s)
Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , Health Facilities , Microbiological Techniques/methods , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/growth & development , Public Sector , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Brazil , Culture Media , Humans , Public HealthABSTRACT
In view of the fact that the World Health Organization has recommended the use of the mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) 960 system for the diagnosis of tuberculosis and that there is as yet no evidence regarding the clinical impact of its use in health care systems, we conducted a pragmatic clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of the use of MGIT 960 at two health care facilities in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where the incidence of tuberculosis is high. Here, we summarize the methodology and preliminary results of the trial. (ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN79888843 [http://isrctn.org/]).
Em razão da recomendação da Organização Mundial da Saúde sobre o uso do sistema mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) 960 para o diagnóstico de tuberculose e da falta de evidências sobre o impacto clínico de sua incorporação em sistemas de saúde, um ensaio clínico pragmático está sendo conduzido para avaliar o desempenho clínico e a relação custo-efetividade do MGIT 960 em duas unidades do Sistema Único de Saúde na cidade do Rio de Janeiro, que tem uma elevada incidência de tuberculose. Apresentamos aqui, de forma sintética, o método e resultados preliminares do ensaio. (ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN79888843 [http://isrctn.org/]).
Subject(s)
Humans , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , Health Facilities , Microbiological Techniques/methods , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/growth & development , Public Sector , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Brazil , Culture Media , Public HealthABSTRACT
In this manuscript, we report the current situation of tuberculosis globally and in Brazil, the need for new strategies toward tuberculosis control, focusing on new diagnostic technologies. Critical comments are given on the state of the art regarding the evaluation of new health technologies, degree of scientific evidence needed, evaluation of clinical impact, cost-effectiveness of incorporation into the health system and the social impact.
Subject(s)
Humans , Bacteriological Techniques/methods , Developing Countries , Global Health , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Bacteriological Techniques/economics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Review Literature as Topic , Tuberculosis/epidemiologyABSTRACT
In this manuscript, we report the current situation of tuberculosis globally and in Brazil, the need for new strategies toward tuberculosis control, focusing on new diagnostic technologies. Critical comments are given on the state of the art regarding the evaluation of new health technologies, degree of scientific evidence needed, evaluation of clinical impact, cost-effectiveness of incorporation into the health system and the social impact.
