Cargando…

One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy of one-sputum sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from January 2012 to December 2015 were analyzed to find (1) number of smear positives (SPs) by spot (S) sample with one and two smears; (2) numb...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Chandra, T. Jaya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5896177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692576
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JLP.JLP_145_17
_version_ 1783313792898170880
author Chandra, T. Jaya
author_facet Chandra, T. Jaya
author_sort Chandra, T. Jaya
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy of one-sputum sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from January 2012 to December 2015 were analyzed to find (1) number of smear positives (SPs) by spot (S) sample with one and two smears; (2) number of SPs by morning (M) sample with one and two smears; and (iii) number of SPs by two samples with two smears, that is, same-day (SS(2)) and spot morning (SM) approaches. The Chi-square test was used to evaluate the statistical difference in SP cases. RESULTS: With one-sample two-smear approach, the smear positivity (SPT) was 87% and 87.5%, for S and M samples, respectively, for Ziehl–Neelsen (ZN) staining; whereas, SPT was 96% and 97%, respectively, for S and M samples, for fluorescent staining (FS) technique. With two-sample two-smear approach, for ZN staining, SPT was 89% each and for FS technique, SPT was 97% and 99%, respectively, for SS(2) and SM approaches. The difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05) between one- and two-sample approaches in the staining techniques. CONCLUSION: Significant number of SP cases are identified by S sample two-smear approach. Thus, the World Health Organization/Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme can initiate S sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of PT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5896177
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58961772018-04-24 One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis Chandra, T. Jaya J Lab Physicians Original Article BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy of one-sputum sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from January 2012 to December 2015 were analyzed to find (1) number of smear positives (SPs) by spot (S) sample with one and two smears; (2) number of SPs by morning (M) sample with one and two smears; and (iii) number of SPs by two samples with two smears, that is, same-day (SS(2)) and spot morning (SM) approaches. The Chi-square test was used to evaluate the statistical difference in SP cases. RESULTS: With one-sample two-smear approach, the smear positivity (SPT) was 87% and 87.5%, for S and M samples, respectively, for Ziehl–Neelsen (ZN) staining; whereas, SPT was 96% and 97%, respectively, for S and M samples, for fluorescent staining (FS) technique. With two-sample two-smear approach, for ZN staining, SPT was 89% each and for FS technique, SPT was 97% and 99%, respectively, for SS(2) and SM approaches. The difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05) between one- and two-sample approaches in the staining techniques. CONCLUSION: Significant number of SP cases are identified by S sample two-smear approach. Thus, the World Health Organization/Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme can initiate S sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of PT. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5896177/ /pubmed/29692576 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JLP.JLP_145_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Laboratory Physicians http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Chandra, T. Jaya
One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title_full One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title_fullStr One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title_full_unstemmed One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title_short One-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
title_sort one-sample two-smear versus two-sample two-smear approach for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5896177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692576
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JLP.JLP_145_17
work_keys_str_mv AT chandratjaya onesampletwosmearversustwosampletwosmearapproachforthediagnosisofpulmonarytuberculosis