Top

BMC Infectious Diseases

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Tuberculosis | Research

Tuberculosis screening costs and cost-effectiveness in high-risk groups: a systematic review

Authors: H. Alsdurf, B. Empringham, C. Miller, A. Zwerling

Published in: BMC Infectious Diseases | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Systematic screening for active tuberculosis (TB) is a strategy which requires the health system to seek out individuals, rather than waiting for individuals to self-present with symptoms (i.e., passive case finding). Our review aimed to summarize the current economic evidence and understand the costs and cost-effectiveness of systematic screening approaches among high-risk groups and settings.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review on economic evaluations of screening for TB disease targeting persons with clinical and/or structural risk factors, such as persons living with HIV (PLHIV) or persons experiencing homelessness. We searched three databases for studies published between January 1, 2010 and February 1, 2020. Studies were included if they reported cost and a key outcome measure. Owing to considerable heterogeneity in settings and type of screening strategy, we synthesized data descriptively.

Results

A total of 27 articles were included in our review; 19/27 (70%) took place in high TB burden countries. Seventeen studies took place among persons with clinical risk factors, including 14 among PLHIV, while 13 studies were among persons with structural risk factors. Nine studies reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranging from US$51 to $1980 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Screening was most cost-effective among PLHIV. Among persons with clinical and structural risk factors there was limited evidence, but screening was generally not shown to be cost-effective.

Conclusions

Studies showed that screening is most likely to be cost-effective in a high TB prevalence population. Our review highlights that to reach the “missing millions” TB programmes should focus on simple, cheaper initial screening tools (i.e., symptom screen and CXR) followed by molecular diagnostic tools (i.e., Xpert®) among the highest risk groups in the local setting (i.e., PLHIV, urban slums). Programmatic costs greatly impact cost-effectiveness thus future research should provide both fixed and variable costs of screening interventions to improve comparability.

Available only for authorised users

World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2020. Geneva: WHO; 2020.

Golub JE, Mohan CI, Comstock GW, et al. Active case finding of tuberculosis: historical perspective and future prospects. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2005;9(11):1183–203.PubMed

WHO consolidated guidelines on tuberculosis: Module 2: screening—systematic screening for tuberculosis disease. Geneva2021.

Fox GJ, Johnston JC, Nguyen TA, et al. Active case-finding in contacts of people with TB. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2021;25(2):95–105. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.20.0658.CrossRefPubMed

Kranzer K, Houben RM, Glynn JR, et al. Yield of HIV-associated tuberculosis during intensified case finding in resource-limited settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2010;10(2):93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70326-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kuupiel D, Bawontuo V, Mashamba-Thompson TP. Mapping evidence on tuberculosis active case finding policies, strategies, and interventions for tuberculosis key populations: a systematic scoping review protocol. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):162. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1098-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Singh M, Sagili KD, Tripathy JP, et al. Are treatment outcomes of patients with tuberculosis detected by active case finding different from those detected by passive case finding? J Glob Infect Dis. 2020;12(1):28–33. https://doi.org/10.4103/jgid.jgid_66_19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Shriraam V, Srihari R, Gayathri T, et al. Active case finding for Tuberculosis among migrant brick kiln workers in South India. Indian J Tuberc. 2020;67(1):38–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtb.2019.09.003.CrossRefPubMed

Jeon CY, Murray MB. Diabetes mellitus increases the risk of active tuberculosis: a systematic review of 13 observational studies. PLoS Med. 2008;5(7): e152. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050152.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Sawert H, Kongsin S, Payanandana V, et al. Costs and benefits of improving tuberculosis control: the case of Thailand. Soc Sci Med. 1997;44(12):1805–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00289-4.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Jit M, Stagg HR, Aldridge RW, et al. Dedicated outreach service for hard to reach patients with tuberculosis in London: observational study and economic evaluation. BMJ. 2011;343: d5376. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5376.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Silva EN, Pereira A, de Araujo WN, et al. A systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions to tackle tuberculosis in homeless people. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2018;42: e40. https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2018.40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Tavoschi L, Vroling H, Madeddu G, et al. Active case finding for communicable diseases in prison settings: increasing testing coverage and uptake among the prison population in the European union/European economic area. Epidemiol Rev. 2018;40(1):105–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxy001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Fox GJ, Barry SE, Britton WJ, et al. Contact investigation for tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J. 2013;41(1):140–56. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00070812.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Zenner D, Southern J, van Hest R, et al. Active case finding for tuberculosis among high-risk groups in low-incidence countries. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2013;17(5):573–82. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.12.0920.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Dasgupta K, Menzies D. Cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis control strategies among immigrants and refugees. Eur Respir J. 2005;25(6):1107–16. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.05.00074004.CrossRefPubMed

17.

de Siqueira-Filha NT, Legood R, Cavalcanti A, et al. Cost of tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment in patients with HIV: a systematic literature review. Value Health. 2018;21(4):482–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.09.003.CrossRefPubMed

18.

World Health Organization. Social determinants of health: Key concepts 2013. https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/social-determinants-of-health-key-concepts accessed November 23 2020.

19.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):W65-94. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136.CrossRef

20.

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ. 2013;346: f1049. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1049.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)–explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Health. 2013;16(2):231–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2013.02.002.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Leech AA, Kim DD, Cohen JT, et al. Use and misuse of cost-effectiveness analysis thresholds in low- and middle-income countries: trends in cost-per-DALY studies. Value Health. 2018;21(7):759–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.016.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Marseille E, Larson B, Kazi DS, et al. Thresholds for the cost-effectiveness of interventions: alternative approaches. Bull World Health Organ. 2015;93(2):118–24. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.14.138206.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Bertram MY, Lauer JA, De Joncheere K, et al. Cost-effectiveness thresholds: pros and cons. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94(12):925–30. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.164418.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Organization WH. New cost-effectiveness updates from WHO-CHOICE Geneva: World Health Organization; https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/new-cost-effectiveness-updates-from-who-choice accessed August 13, 2021.

27.

Turner HC, Lauer JA, Tran BX, et al. Adjusting for inflation and currency changes within health economic studies. Value Health. 2019;22(9):1026–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.03.021.CrossRefPubMed

28.

World Data Inflation Rate Calculator Oldenburg, Germany. https://www.worlddata.info/ accessed June 29 2020.

29.

Abimbola TO, Marston BJ, Date AA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis diagnostic strategies to reduce early mortality among persons with advanced HIV infection initiating antiretroviral therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2012;60(1):e1-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0b013e318246538f.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Andrews JR, Lawn SD, Rusu C, et al. The cost-effectiveness of routine tuberculosis screening with Xpert MTB/RIF prior to initiation of antiretroviral therapy: a model-based analysis. AIDS. 2012;26(8):987–95. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283522d47.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Bassett IV, Wang B, Chetty S, et al. Intensive tuberculosis screening for HIV-infected patients starting antiretroviral therapy in Durban. South Africa Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51(7):823–9. https://doi.org/10.1086/656282.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Bogdanova E, Mariandyshev O, Hinderaker SG, et al. Mass screening for active case finding of pulmonary tuberculosis in the Russian Federation: how to save costs. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2019;23(7):830–7. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.18.0449.CrossRefPubMed

33.

James R, Khim K, Boudarene L, et al. Tuberculosis active case finding in Cambodia: a pragmatic, cost-effectiveness comparison of three implementation models. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17(1):580. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-017-2670-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Ji Y, Cao H, Liu Q, et al. Screening for pulmonary tuberculosis in high-risk groups of diabetic patients. Int J Infect Dis. 2020;93:84–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.01.019.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Jo Y, Mirzoeva F, Chry M, et al. Standardized framework for evaluating costs of active case-finding programs: an analysis of two programs in Cambodia and Tajikistan. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(1): e0228216. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228216.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Karki B, Kittel G, Bolokon I Jr, et al. Active community-based case finding for tuberculosis with limited resources. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2017;29(1):17–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1010539516683497.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Kranzer K, Lawn SD, Meyer-Rath G, et al. Feasibility, yield, and cost of active tuberculosis case finding linked to a mobile HIV service in Cape Town, South Africa: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2012;9(8): e1001281. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001281.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Machekera SM, Wilkinson E, Hinderaker SG, et al. A comparison of the yield and relative cost of active tuberculosis case-finding algorithms in Zimbabwe. Public Health Action. 2019;9(2):63–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.18.0098.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Maheswaran H, Barton P. Intensive case finding and isoniazid preventative therapy in HIV infected individuals in Africa: economic model and value of information analysis. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(1): e30457. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030457.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Murray M, Cattamanchi A, Denkinger C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of triage testing for facility-based systematic screening of tuberculosis among Ugandan adults. BMJ Glob Health. 2016;1(2): e000064. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000064.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Orlando S, Triulzi I, Ciccacci F, et al. Delayed diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis in HIV+ patients in Mozambique: a cost-effectiveness analysis of screening protocols based on four symptom screening, smear microscopy, urine LAM test and Xpert MTB/RIF. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(7): e0200523. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200523.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Reddy KP, Gupta-Wright A, Fielding KL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of urine-based tuberculosis screening in hospitalised patients with HIV in Africa: a microsimulation modelling study. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7(2):e200–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30436-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Sekandi JN, Dobbin K, Oloya J, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of community active case finding and household contact investigation for tuberculosis case detection in urban Africa. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(2): e0117009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117009.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Shah NS, Anh MH, Thuy TT, et al. Population-based chest X-ray screening for pulmonary tuberculosis in people living with HIV/AIDS, An Giang, Vietnam. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2008;12(4):404–10.PubMed

45.

Shah S, Demissie M, Lambert L, et al. Intensified tuberculosis case finding among HIV-Infected persons from a voluntary counseling and testing center in Addis Ababa. Ethiopia J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2009;50(5):537–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0b013e318196761c.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Shah L, Rojas M, Mori O, et al. Cost-effectiveness of active case-finding of household contacts of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in a low HIV, tuberculosis-endemic urban area of Lima. Peru Epidemiol Infect. 2017;145(6):1107–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268816003186.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Smit GS, Apers L, Arrazola de Onate W, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening for active cases of tuberculosis in Flanders, Belgium. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95(1):27–35. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.169383.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Winetsky DE, Negoescu DM, DeMarchis EH, et al. Screening and rapid molecular diagnosis of tuberculosis in prisons in Russia and Eastern Europe: a cost-effectiveness analysis. PLoS Med. 2012;9(11): e1001348. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001348.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Yoon C, Semitala FC, Asege L, et al. Yield and efficiency of novel intensified tuberculosis case-finding algorithms for people living with HIV. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(5):643–50. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201803-0490OC.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Zhang C, Ruan Y, Cheng J, et al. Comparing yield and relative costs of WHO TB screening algorithms in selected risk groups among people aged 65 years and over in China, 2013. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6): e0176581. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176581.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Zishiri V, Charalambous S, Shah MR, et al. Implementing a large-scale systematic tuberculosis screening program in correctional facilities in South Africa. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015;2(1):ofu121. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofu121.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Zwerling AA, Sahu M, Ngwira LG, et al. Screening for tuberculosis among adults newly diagnosed with HIV in sub-saharan Africa: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;70(1):83–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000712.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Adelman MW, McFarland DA, Tsegaye M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of WHO-recommended algorithms for TB case finding at Ethiopian HIV clinics. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018;5(1):ofx269. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofx269.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Sohn H, Vyas A, Puri L, et al. Costs and operation management of community outreach program for tuberculosis in tribal populations in India. Public Health Action. 2019;9(2):58–62. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.18.0091.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Systematic Screening for Active Tuberculosis: Principles and Recommendations. Geneva2013.

56.

Ochalek J, Claxton K, Lomas J, et al. Valuing health outcomes: developing better defaults based on health opportunity costs. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2020.1812387.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Mandrik OL, Severens JLH, Bardach A, et al. Critical appraisal of systematic reviews with costs and cost-effectiveness outcomes: an ISPOR good practices task force report. Value Health. 2021;24(4):463–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2021.01.002.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Cilloni L, Fu H, Vesga JF, et al. The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the tuberculosis epidemic a modelling analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;28: 100603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Sahu S, Ditiu L, Sachdeva KS, et al. Recovering from the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and accelerating to achieving the United Nations general assembly tuberculosis targets. Int J Infect Dis. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.02.078[publishedOnlineFirst:2021/03/16].CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Tuberculosis screening costs and cost-effectiveness in high-risk groups: a systematic review
Authors: H. Alsdurf
B. Empringham
C. Miller
A. Zwerling
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Tuberculosis
Tuberculosis
Human Immunodeficiency Virus
Published in: BMC Infectious Diseases / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2334
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06633-3

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits

Illustration of figure on mountain summit/© Orapun / Stock.adobe.com, STEP AAG HeroTeaserCollection image/© Tarek / Generated with AI / Stock.adobe.com, ACC 2024 Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 Pulmonary Vascular Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 Valvular Heart Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 HF and Cardiomyopathies: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, Woman out walking/© Seventyfour / stock.adobe.com (symbolic image with model), Woman checking smartwatch /© saltdium / stock.adobe.com (symbolic image with model), Cardiac catheterization/© Damian / stock.adobe.com

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

The distribution of hepatitis C virus infection in Shanghai, China: a time-spatial study

Prognostic value of pro-adrenomedullin and copeptin in acute infective endocarditis

High frequency of Taenia solium antigen positivity in patients admitted for neurological disorders in the Rural Hospital of Mosango, Democratic Republic of Congo

Cholera outbreak caused by drinking unprotected well water contaminated with faeces from an open storm water drainage: Kampala City, Uganda, January 2019

Laboratory diagnosis and management of COVID-19 cases: creating a safe testing environment

Demographic, clinical, and laboratory factors associated with renal parenchymal injury in Iranian children with acute pyelonephritis

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage