Cargando…

Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies

BACKGROUND: Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) for TB have the potential to replace the tuberculin skin test (TST) in screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The higher per-test cost of IGRAs may be compensated for by lower post-screening costs (medical attention, chest x-rays and chemo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nienhaus, Albert, Schablon, Anja, Costa, José Torres, Diel, Roland
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196701/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21961888
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-247
_version_ 1782214233932431360
author Nienhaus, Albert
Schablon, Anja
Costa, José Torres
Diel, Roland
author_facet Nienhaus, Albert
Schablon, Anja
Costa, José Torres
Diel, Roland
author_sort Nienhaus, Albert
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) for TB have the potential to replace the tuberculin skin test (TST) in screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The higher per-test cost of IGRAs may be compensated for by lower post-screening costs (medical attention, chest x-rays and chemoprevention), given the higher specificity of the new tests as compared to that of the conventional TST. We conducted a systematic review of all publications that have addressed the cost or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. The objective of this report was to undertake a structured review and critical appraisal of the methods used for the model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of TB screening programmes. METHODS: Using Medline and Embase, 75 publications that contained the terms "IGRA", "tuberculosis" and "cost" were identified. Of these, 13 were original studies on the costs or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. RESULTS: The 13 relevant studies come from five low-to-medium TB-incidence countries. Five studies took only the costs of screening into consideration, while eight studies analysed the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies. Screening was performed in high-risk groups: close contacts, immigrants from high-incidence countries and healthcare workers. Two studies used the T-SPOT.TB as an IGRA and the other studies used the QuantiFERON-TB Gold and/or Gold In-Tube test. All 13 studies observed a decrease in costs when the IGRAs were used. Six studies compared the use of an IGRA as a test to confirm a positive TST (TST/IGRA strategy) to the use of an IGRA-only strategy. In four of these studies, the two-step strategy and in two the IGRA-only strategy was more cost-effective. Assumptions about TST specificity and progression risk after a positive test had the greatest influence on determining which IGRA strategy was more cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The available studies on cost-effectiveness provide strong evidence in support of the use of IGRAs in screening risk groups such as HCWs, immigrants from high-incidence countries and close contacts. So far, only two studies provide evidence that the IGRA-only screening strategy is more cost-effective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3196701
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31967012011-10-20 Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies Nienhaus, Albert Schablon, Anja Costa, José Torres Diel, Roland BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) for TB have the potential to replace the tuberculin skin test (TST) in screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The higher per-test cost of IGRAs may be compensated for by lower post-screening costs (medical attention, chest x-rays and chemoprevention), given the higher specificity of the new tests as compared to that of the conventional TST. We conducted a systematic review of all publications that have addressed the cost or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. The objective of this report was to undertake a structured review and critical appraisal of the methods used for the model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of TB screening programmes. METHODS: Using Medline and Embase, 75 publications that contained the terms "IGRA", "tuberculosis" and "cost" were identified. Of these, 13 were original studies on the costs or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. RESULTS: The 13 relevant studies come from five low-to-medium TB-incidence countries. Five studies took only the costs of screening into consideration, while eight studies analysed the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies. Screening was performed in high-risk groups: close contacts, immigrants from high-incidence countries and healthcare workers. Two studies used the T-SPOT.TB as an IGRA and the other studies used the QuantiFERON-TB Gold and/or Gold In-Tube test. All 13 studies observed a decrease in costs when the IGRAs were used. Six studies compared the use of an IGRA as a test to confirm a positive TST (TST/IGRA strategy) to the use of an IGRA-only strategy. In four of these studies, the two-step strategy and in two the IGRA-only strategy was more cost-effective. Assumptions about TST specificity and progression risk after a positive test had the greatest influence on determining which IGRA strategy was more cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The available studies on cost-effectiveness provide strong evidence in support of the use of IGRAs in screening risk groups such as HCWs, immigrants from high-incidence countries and close contacts. So far, only two studies provide evidence that the IGRA-only screening strategy is more cost-effective. BioMed Central 2011-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3196701/ /pubmed/21961888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-247 Text en Copyright ©2011 Nienhaus et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Nienhaus, Albert
Schablon, Anja
Costa, José Torres
Diel, Roland
Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title_full Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title_fullStr Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title_short Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
title_sort systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different tb-screening strategies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196701/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21961888
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-247
work_keys_str_mv AT nienhausalbert systematicreviewofcostandcosteffectivenessofdifferenttbscreeningstrategies
AT schablonanja systematicreviewofcostandcosteffectivenessofdifferenttbscreeningstrategies
AT costajosetorres systematicreviewofcostandcosteffectivenessofdifferenttbscreeningstrategies
AT dielroland systematicreviewofcostandcosteffectivenessofdifferenttbscreeningstrategies