National Center for Tuberculosis Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Clinical Trial Center, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Aug 13;21(1):813. doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06486-w.
Part 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.
The 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.
Algorithm 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.
Active 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.
如果基于主要结核病可能症状进行症状性筛查,部分结核病(TB)患者可能会被遗漏。本研究旨在比较不同结核病筛查算法在我国全人群主动筛查中的检出率和相对成本。
本研究在我国 10 个省的 10 个县的 27 个社区中,通过面对面访谈,基于结核病可能症状对研究人群进行筛查。如果个体有任何增强的结核病可能症状,将对其进一步进行胸部 X 光和痰检。我们使用 McNemar 检验分析在主动筛查中,四种算法之间的结核病检出率差异。在四种算法中,两种来自世卫组织推荐的算法,一种来自中国国家结核病规划,一种来自本研究的增强的结核病可能症状。此外,还对不同算法之间,基于不同人口统计学和健康特征的主动筛查表现进行了双向方差分析。
与世卫组织(p < 0.01,Kappa 95%CI:0.93-0.99)和中国国家结核病规划(p = 0.03,Kappa 95%CI:0.96-1.00)推荐的算法相比,本研究中定义的增强的结核病可能症状的算法可提高主动筛查中结核病的检出率。在 WHO 1c/2/3 三种算法中,总费用存在显著差异(F = 59.13,p < 0.01)。算法 1c/2/3 之间筛查和诊断一个活动性结核病病例的平均成本没有显著差异(F = 2.78,p = 0.07)。通过算法 WHO 1a 筛查出的一个细菌学阳性病例的平均成本大约是通过算法 WHO 1c/2/3 筛查出的一个活动性结核病病例的两倍。
基于增强症状筛查的主动筛查对结核病的发现具有重要意义,可及时发现更多的活动性结核病病例。研究结果表明,与世卫组织和中国国家结核病规划推荐的算法相比,这种增强的筛查方法成本更高,但增加的检出率导致了每个患者的相对成本。而且,仅对涂片/细菌学阳性的结核病病例进行主动筛查的成本要高得多。