Dataset Information

Comparison of two methods for acquisition of sputum samples for diagnosis of suspected tuberculosis in smear-negative or sputum-scarce people: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Sputum obtained either under instruction from a health-care worker or through induction can improve case detection of active tuberculosis. However, the best initial sputum sampling strategy for adults with suspected smear-negative or sputum-scarce tuberculosis in primary care is unclear. We compared these two methods of sample acquisition in such patients.In this randomised controlled trial, we enrolled adults (age ?18 years) with sputum-scarce or smear-negative suspected tuberculosis from three primary care clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either health-care worker instruction or induction to obtain sputum samples. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had started treatment after 8 weeks in a modified intention-to-treat population. Secondary outcomes were proportions starting treatment within different time periods, proportion of patients producing sputum for diagnosis, adverse effects, sputum samples' quality, and case detection by diagnostic method. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01545661.We enrolled 481 patients, of whom 213 were assigned to health-care worker instruction versus 268 assigned to induction. The proportion of patients who started treatment in the 8 weeks after enrolment did not differ significantly between groups (53/213 [25%] vs 73/268 [27%]; OR 0·88, 95% CI 0·57-1·36; p=0·56). A higher proportion of instructed versus induced patients initiated empiric treatment based on clinical and radiography findings (32/53 [60%] vs 28/73 [38%]; p=0·015). An adequate sputum sample ?1 mL was acquired in a lower proportion of instructed versus induced patients (164/213 [77%] vs 238/268 [89%]; p<0·0001), and culture-based diagnostic yield was lower in instructed versus induced patients (24/213 [11%] vs 51/268 [19%]; p=0·020). However, same-day tuberculosis case detection was similar in both groups using either smear microscopy (13/213 [6%] vs 22/268 [8%]; p=0·38) or Xpert-MTB/RIF assay (13/89 [15%] vs 20/138 [14%]; p=0·98). No serious adverse events occurred in either group; side-effects related to sample acquisition were reported in 32 of 268 (12%) patients who had sputum induction and none who had instruction. Cost per procedure was lower for instructed than for induced patients (US$2·14 vs US$7·88).Although induction provides an adequate sample and a bacteriological diagnosis more frequently than instruction by a health-care worker, it is more costly, does not result in a higher proportion of same-day diagnoses, and-because of widespread empiric treatment-may not result in more patients starting treatment. Thus, health-care worker instruction might be the preferred strategy for initial collection of sputum samples in adults with suspected sputum-scarce or smear-negative tuberculosis in a high burden primary care setting.South African National Research Foundation, European Commission, National Institutes of Health, European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, Discovery Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Peter JG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4632198 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of two methods for acquisition of sputum samples for diagnosis of suspected tuberculosis in smear-negative or sputum-scarce people: a randomised controlled trial.

Peter Jonathan G JG Theron Grant G Pooran Anil A Thomas Johnson J Pascoe Mellissa M Dheda Keertan K

The Lancet. Respiratory medicine 20130719 6

<h4>Background</h4>Sputum obtained either under instruction from a health-care worker or through induction can improve case detection of active tuberculosis. However, the best initial sputum sampling strategy for adults with suspected smear-negative or sputum-scarce tuberculosis in primary care is unclear. We compared these two methods of sample acquisition in such patients.<h4>Methods</h4>In this randomised controlled trial, we enrolled adults (age ≥18 years) with sputum-scarce or smear-negativ ...[more]

PMID: 24429245

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Xpert® MTB/RIF (Xpert) has high sensitivity for diagnosing tuberculosis (TB) compared to sputum-smear microscopy (smear) and can reduce time-to-diagnosis, time-to-treatment and potentially unfavorable patient-level treatment outcome. METHODS:People living with HIV (PLHIV) initiating antiretroviral therapy at 22 HIV clinics were enrolled and underwent systematic screening for TB (August 2012-November 2014). GeneXpert instruments were deployed following a stepped-wedge design at 13 centers from October 2012-June 2013. Treatment outcomes classified as an unfavorable outcome (died, treatment failure or loss-to-follow-up) or favorable outcome (cured and treatment completed). To determine outcome, smear was performed at month 5 or 6. Empiric treatment was defined as initiating treatment without/before receiving TB-positive results. Adjusting for intra-facility correlation, we compared patient-level treatment outcomes between patients screened using smear (smear arm)- and Xpert-based algorithms (Xpert arm). RESULTS:Among 6041 patients enrolled (smear arm, 1816; Xpert arm, 4225), 256 (199 per 2985 and 57 per 1582 person-years of follow-up in Xpert and smear arms, respectively; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 9.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.70-17.48; p?<?0.001) received TB diagnosis and were treated. TB treatment outcomes were available for 203 patients (79.3%; Xpert, 157; smear, 46). Unfavorable outcomes were reported for 21.7% (10/46) in the smear and 13.4% (21/157) in Xpert arm (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI: 0.75-2.26; p?=?0.268). Compared to smear, in Xpert arm median days from sputum collection to TB treatment was 6?days (interquartile range [IQR] 2-17 versus 22?days [IQR] 3-51), p?=?0.005; patients with available sputum test result had microbiologically confirmed TB in 59.0% (102/173) versus 41.9% (18/43), adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 2.00, 95% CI: 1.01-3.96, p?=?0.048). In smear arm empiric treatment was 68.4% (39/57) versus 48.7% (97/199), aOR, 2.28, 95% CI: 1.24-4.20, p?=?0.011), compared to Xpert arm. CONCLUSIONS:TB treatment outcomes were similar between the smear and Xpert arms. However, compared to the smear arm, more patients in the Xpert arm received a TB diagnosis, had a microbiologically confirmed TB, and had a shorter time-to-treatment, and had a lower empiric treatment. Further research is recommended to identify potential gaps in the Botswana health system and similar settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02538952. Retrospectively registered on 2 September 2015.

Project description:BackgroundIntroduction of GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay has constituted a major breakthrough for tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics. Several patient factors may influence diagnostic performance of Xpert including sputum quality.ObjectiveWe carried out a prospective, observational, cross-sectional study to determine the effect of sputum quality on diagnostic performance of Xpert among presumed TB patients in Uganda.MethodsWe collected clinical and demographic information and two sputum samples from participants. Staff recorded sputum quality and performed LED fluorescence microscopy and mycobacterial culture on each sample. If both smear examinations were negative, Xpert testing was performed. We calculated diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, and other indicators for Xpert for each stratum of sputum quality in reference to a standard of mycobacterial culture.ResultsPatients with salivary sputum showed a trend towards a substantially higher proportion of samples that were Xpert-positive (54/286, 19%, 95% CI 15-24) compared with those with all other sputum sample types (221/1496, 15%, 95% CI 13-17). Blood-stained sputum produced the lowest sensitivity (28%; 95% CI 12-49) and salivary sputum the highest (66%; 95% CI 53-77). Specificity didn't vary meaningfully by sample types. Salivary sputum was significantly more sensitive than mucoid sputum (+13%, 95% CI +1 to +26), while blood-stained sputum was significantly less sensitive (-24%, 95% CI -42 to -5).ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate the need to exercise caution in collecting sputum for Xpert and in interpreting results because sputum quality may impact test yield and sensitivity. In particular, it may be wise to pursue additional testing should blood-stained sputum test negative while salivary sputum should be readily accepted for Xpert testing given its higher sensitivity and potentially higher yield than other sample types. These findings challenge conventional recommendations against collecting salivary sputum for TB diagnosis and could inform new standards for sputum quality.

Project description:In Zimbabwe, sputum smear microscopy (SSM) is the routinely used TB diagnostic tool in hospitalised HIV-infected patients. However, SSM has poor sensitivity in HIV-infected patients. We compared performance of urine lipoarabinomannan strip test (LAM) and SSM among hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB.Hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB were randomized to LAM plus SSM or SSM alone groups as part of a larger multi-country parent study. Here we present a comparison of LAM versus SSM performance from the Zimbabwe study site. LAM analyses (grade 2 cut-off) were conducted using (i) a microbiological reference standard (MRS; culture positivity for M.tb and designated definite TB) and (ii) a composite reference standard (CRS; definite TB plus probable TB i.e. patients with clinical TB excluded from the culture negative group). CRS constituted the primary analysis.82/457 (18%) of the patients randomized to the LAM group were M.tuberculosis culture positive. Using CRS, sensitivity (%, 95% CI) of LAM was significantly higher than SSM [49.2 (42.1-56.4) versus 29.4(23.2-36.3); p?<?0.001]. Specificity and PPV were 98.1%, and 95.8%, respectively. By contrast, using MRS, LAM sensitivity was similar to SSM and specificity was significantly lower, however, the combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was significantly higher than that of SSM alone, p?=?0.009. Using CRS, LAM sensitivity (%, CI) was CD4 count dependent [60.6(50.7-69.8) at ?50 cells/?L; 40.0(22.7-59.4) at 51-100 cells/?L, and 32.8(21.0-46.3) at >100 cells/?L. The combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was higher than SSM alone being highest at CD4 counts <50 cells/?L [67.6(57.9-76.3); p?=?<0.001]. Specificity of LAM or SSM alone, or of combined LAM and SSM was >97% in all the 3 CD4 strata.Among hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB, the sensitivity of LAM is significantly higher than that of SSM, especially at low CD4 counts. LAM and SSM are complimentary tests for diagnosis of TB in HIV-infected patients. We recommend a combination of LAM and SSM for TB diagnosis in HIV-infected patients with low CD4 counts in HIV/TB co-endemic countries, where alternative methods are unavailable.

Project description:IntroductionTajikistan has a laboratory network with three levels of tuberculosis (TB) laboratories. The external quality assessment (EQA) of sputum smear microscopy was implemented in 2007. The objective of this study was to evaluate the EQA system and identify potential performance improvement strategies in TB microscopic laboratories in Sughd, Tajikistan.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional study based on retrospective record review and secondary data analyses on Acid-Fast Bacilli (AFB) microscopy data and EQA reading results collected between the first quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2013. Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine the overview of microscopy laboratories activities, EQA results, and laboratory performance.ResultOf the 123,874 smears examined between 2011 and 2013, 11,522 (9.30%) were re-checked by the EQA system. The population TB screening rate rose from 0.46% in 2011 to 0.57% in 2013, and the case positivity rate decreased from 6.98% to 4.80%. The regional EQA results showed a reduction in high false-positive, high false-negative, and low false-negative errors. False-positive errors had decreased from 0.13% in 2011 to 0.07% in 2013, and false-negative errors from 0.91% in 2011 to 0.15% in 2013. Regional sensitivity of smear microscopy, when compared to re-checking controller, increased from 88.2% in 2011 to 97.2% in 2013. The regional specificity level remained relatively stable at above 99%.ConclusionOur study found that a decreasing trend of case positivity rate from 2011 to 2013 in Sughd, though the overall laboratory workload was on the rise. In addition, EQA results showed an overall error reduction and an improved sensitivity of smear microscopy in the region. The overview of microscopic laboratory activities and the actual evaluation of the EQA system on sputum smear microscopy complement each other in providing a better picture on the progress of TB laboratory strengthening. We recommend similar approaches to be adapted by future evaluations on TB microscopic laboratories, particularly among countries of high burden. Interactive training and feedback loops are crucial to improving TB surveillance in Tajikistan.

Dataset Information

Comparison of two methods for acquisition of sputum samples for diagnosis of suspected tuberculosis in smear-negative or sputum-scarce people: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Comparison of two methods for acquisition of sputum samples for diagnosis of suspected tuberculosis in smear-negative or sputum-scarce people: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets