Dataset Information

Yield and Coverage of Active Case Finding Interventions for Tuberculosis Control:A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Active case finding (ACF) for tuberculosis (TB) is a key strategy to reduce diagnostic delays, expedite treatment, and prevent transmission.

Objective

Our objective was to identify the populations, settings, screening and diagnostic approaches that optimize coverage (proportion of those targeted who were screened) and yield (proportion of those screened who had active TB) in ACF programs.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search to identify studies published from 1980-2016 that reported the coverage and yield of different ACF approaches. For each outcome, we conducted meta-analyses of single proportions to produce estimates across studies, followed by meta-regression to identify predictors. Findings. Of 3,972 publications identified, 224 met criteria after full-text review. Most individuals who were targeted successfully completed screening, for a pooled coverage estimate of 93.5%. The pooled yield of active TB across studies was 3.2%. Settings with the highest yield were internally-displaced persons camps (15.6%) and healthcare facilities (6.9%). When compared to symptom screening as the reference standard, studies that screened individuals regardless of symptoms using microscopy, culture, or GeneXpert®MTB/RIF (Xpert) had 3.7% higher case yield. In particular, microbiological screening (usually microscopy) as the initial test, followed by culture or Xpert for diagnosis had 3.6% higher yield than symptom screening followed by microscopy for diagnosis. In a model adjusted for use of Xpert testing, approaches targeting persons living with HIV (PLWH) had a 4.9% higher yield than those targeting the general population. In all models, studies targeting children had higher yield (4.8%-5.7%) than those targeting adults.

Conclusion

ACF activities can be implemented successfully in various populations and settings. Screening yield was highest in internally-displaced person and healthcare settings, and among PLWH and children. In high-prevalence settings, ACF approaches that screen individuals with laboratory tests regardless of symptoms have higher yield than approaches focused on symptomatic individuals.

SUBMITTER: Deya RW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9274229 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunity-based active case-finding interventions might identify and treat more people with tuberculosis disease than standard case detection. We aimed to assess whether active case-finding interventions can affect tuberculosis epidemiology in the wider community.MethodsWe did a systematic review by searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for studies that compared tuberculosis case notification rates, tuberculosis disease prevalence, or tuberculosis infection prevalence or incidence in children, between populations exposed and unexposed to active case-finding interventions. We included studies published in English between Jan 1, 1980, and April 13, 2020. Studies of active case-finding in the general population, in populations perceived to be at high risk for tuberculosis, and in closed settings were included, whereas studies of tuberculosis screening at health-care facilities, among household contacts, or among children only, and studies that screened fewer than 1000 people were excluded. To estimate effectiveness, we extracted or calculated case notification rates, prevalence of tuberculosis disease, and incidence or prevalence of tuberculosis infection in children, and compared ratios of these outcomes between groups that were exposed or not exposed to active case-finding interventions.Results27 883 abstracts were screened and 988 articles underwent full text review. 28 studies contributed data for analysis of tuberculosis case notifications, nine for prevalence of tuberculosis disease, and two for incidence or prevalence of tuberculosis infection in children. In one cluster-randomised trial in South Africa and Zambia, an active case-finding intervention based on community mobilisation and sputum drop-off did not affect tuberculosis prevalence, whereas, in a cluster-randomised trial in Vietnam, an active case-finding intervention based on sputum tuberculosis tests for everyone reduced tuberculosis prevalence in the community. We found inconsistent, low-quality evidence that active case-finding might increase the number of cases of tuberculosis notified in populations with structural risk factors for tuberculosis.InterpretationCommunity-based active case-finding for tuberculosis might be effective in changing tuberculosis epidemiology and thereby improving population health if delivered with high coverage and intensity. If possible, active case-finding projects should incorporate a well designed, robust evaluation to contribute to the evidence base and help elucidate which delivery methods and diagnostic strategies are most effective.FundingWHO Global TB Programme.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a need to identify scalable tuberculosis screening strategies among high burden populations. The WHO has identified a non-sputum-based triage test as a development priority.MethodsWe performed a diagnostic case-control study of point-of-care C-reactive protein (CRP) and Prototype-Xpert-MTB-Host-Response (Xpert-MTB-HR) assays in the context of a mass screening program for tuberculosis in two prisons in Brazil. All incarcerated individuals irrespective of symptoms were screened by sputum Xpert MTB/RIF and sputum culture. Among consecutive, Xpert MTB/RIF or culture-confirmed cases and Xpert MTB/RIF and culture-negative controls, CRP was quantified in serum by a point-of-care assay (iChroma-II) and a 3-gene expression score was quantified from whole blood using the Xpert-MTB-HR cartridge. We evaluated receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) and assessed specificity at 90% sensitivity and sensitivity at 70% specificity, consistent with WHO target product profile (TPP) benchmarks.FindingsTwo hundred controls (no TB) and 100 culture- or Xpert MTB/RIF-positive tuberculosis cases were included. Half of tuberculosis cases and 11% of controls reported any tuberculosis symptoms. AUC for CRP was 0·79 (95% CI: 0·73-0·84) and for Xpert-MTB-HR was 0·84 (95% CI: 0·79-0·89). At 90% sensitivity, Xpert-MTB-HR had significantly higher specificity (53·0%, 95% CI: 45·0-69·0%) than CRP (28·1%, 95% CI: 20·2-41·8%) (p = 0·003), both well below the TPP benchmark of 70%. Among individuals with medium or high sputum Xpert MTB/RIF semi-quantitative load, sensitivity (at 70% specificity) of CRP (90·3%, 95% CI: 74·2-98·0) and Xpert-MTB-HR (96·8%, 95% CI: 83·3-99·9%) was higher.InterpretationFor active case finding in this high tuberculosis-burden setting, CRP and Xpert-MTB-HR did not meet TPP benchmarks for a triage test. However, Xpert-MTB-HR was highly sensitive in detecting individuals with medium or high sputum bacillary burden.FundingNational Institutes of Health (R01 AI130058 and R01 AI149620) and Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq-404182/2019-4).

Project description:BackgroundPart of tuberculosis (TB) patients were missed if symptomatic screening was based on the main TB likely symptoms. This study conducted to compare the yield and relative costs of different TB screening algorithms in active case-finding in the whole population in China.MethodsThe study population was screened based on the TB likely symptoms through a face-to-face interview in selected 27 communities from 10 counties of 10 provinces in China. If the individuals had any of the enhanced TB likely symptoms, both chest X-ray and sputum tests were carried out for them furtherly. We used the McNemar test to analyze the difference in TB detection among four algorithms in active case-finding. Of four algorithms, two were from WHO recommendations including 1a/1c, one from China National Tuberculosis Program, and one from this study with the enhanced TB likely symptoms. Furthermore, a two-way ANOVA analysis was performed to analyze the cost difference in the performance of active case-finding adjusted by different demographic and health characteristics among different algorithms.ResultsAlgorithm with the enhanced TB likely symptoms defined in this study could increase the yield of TB detection in active case-finding, compared with algorithms recommended by WHO (p < 0.01, Kappa 95% CI: 0. 93-0.99) and China NTP (p = 0.03, Kappa 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). There was a significant difference in the total costs among different three algorithms WHO 1c/2/3 (F = 59.13, p < 0.01). No significant difference in the average costs for one active TB case screened and diagnosed through the process among Algorithms 1c/2/3 was evident (F = 2.78, p = 0.07). The average costs for one bacteriological positive case through algorithm WHO 1a was about two times as much as the costs for one active TB case through algorithms WHO 1c/2/3.ConclusionsActive case-finding based on the enhanced symptom screening is meaningful for TB case-finding and it could identify more active TB cases in time. The findings indicated that this enhanced screening approach cost more compared to algorithms recommend by WHO and China NTP, but the increased yield resulted in comparative costs per patient. And it cost much more that only smear/bacteriological-positive TB cases are screened in active case-finding.