Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

01.08.2015 | Systematic Review

A Systematic Review of Studies Evaluating the Cost Utility of Screening High-Risk Populations for Latent Tuberculosis Infection

verfasst von: Jonathon R. Campbell, Thenuga Sasitharan, Fawziah Marra

Erschienen in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy | Ausgabe 4/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

As tuberculosis screening trends to targeting high-risk populations, knowing the cost effectiveness of such screening is vital to decision makers.

Objectives

The purpose of this review was to compile cost-utility analyses evaluating latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening in high-risk populations that used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as their measure of effectiveness.

Data Sources

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Knowledge, and PubMed was performed from database start to November 2014.

Inclusion Criteria

Studies performed in populations at high risk of LTBI and subsequent reactivation that used the QALY as an effectiveness measure were included.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis

Quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Data extracted included tuberculin skin test (TST) and/or interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) use, economic, screening, treatment, health state, and epidemiologic parameters. Data were summarized in regard to consistency in model parameters and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with costs adjusted to 2013 US dollars.

Results

Of 415 studies identified, ultimately eight studies were included in the review. Most took a societal perspective (n = 4), used lifetime time horizons (n = 6), and used Markov models (n = 8). Screening of adult immigrants was found to be cost effective with a TST in one study, but moderately cost effective with an IGRA in another study; screening immigrants arriving more than 5 years prior with an IGRA was moderately cost effective until 44 years of age (n = 1). Screening HIV-positive patients was highly cost effective with a TST (n = 1) and moderately cost effective with an IGRA (n = 1). Screening in those with renal diseases (n = 2) and diabetes (n = 1) was not cost effective.

Limitations

Very few studies used the QALY as their effectiveness measure. Parameter and study design inconsistencies limit the comparability of studies.

Conclusions

With validity issues in terms of parameters and assumptions, any conclusion should be interpreted with caution. Despite this, some cautionary recommendations emerged: screening HIV patients with a TST is highly cost effective, while screening adult immigrants with an IGRA is moderately cost effective.
Literatur
1.
2.
Walter ND, Painter J, Parker M, Lowenthal P, Flood J, Fu Y, et al. Persistent latent tuberculosis reactivation risk in United States immigrants. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;189:88–95.PubMedCentralPubMed
3.
Sudre P, ten Dam G, Kochi A. Tuberculosis: a global overview of the situation today. Bull World Health Organ. 1992;70:149–59.PubMedCentralPubMed
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Jerant A, Bannon M, Rittenhouse S. Identification and management of tuberculosis. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61(2667–78):2681–2.
9.
Menzies D, Pai M, Comstock G. Meta-analysis: new tests for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection: areas of uncertainty and recommendations for research. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:340–54.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Mazurek GH, Villarino ME, CDC. Guidelines for using the QuantiFERON-TB test for diagnosing latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2003;52:15–8.PubMed
11.
Chee CBE, KhinMar KW, Gan SH, Barkham TMS, Pushparani M, Wang YT. Latent tuberculosis infection treatment and T-cell responses to Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific antigens. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;175:282–7.PubMedCrossRef
12.
MacPherson P, Houben RM, Glynn JR, Corbett EL, Kranzer K. Pre-treatment loss to follow-up in tuberculosis patients in low- and lower-middle-income countries and high-burden countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92:126–38.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
14.
Lorgelly PK, Lawson KD, Fenwick EAL, Briggs AH. Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of public health interventions: a role for the capability approach? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2010;7:2274–89.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
15.
Robberstad B. QALYs vs DALYs vs LYs gained: what are the differences, and what difference do they make for health care priority setting? Nor Epidemiol. 2005;15(2):183–91.
16.
Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, Daniels N, Weinstein MC. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1172–7.PubMedCrossRef
17.
18.
Garrison LP. Editorial: on the benefits of modeling using QALYs for societal resource allocation: the model is the message. Value Health. 2009;12:S36–7.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(264–9):W64.
20.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. BMC Med. 2013;11:80.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ. 1992;146:473–81.PubMedCentralPubMed
23.
Robert M, Kaplan JWB. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1982;1:61–80.CrossRef
24.
Kowada A. Cost effectiveness of interferon-γ release assay for TB screening of HIV positive pregnant women in low TB incidence countries. J Infect. 2014;68:32–42.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Kowada A. Cost effectiveness of interferon-gamma release assay for tuberculosis screening of rheumatoid arthritis patients prior to initiation of tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist therapy. Mol Diagn Ther. 2010;14:367–73.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kowada A. Cost effectiveness of the interferon-γ release assay for tuberculosis screening of hemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013;28:682–8.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Laskin BL, Goebel J, Starke JR, Schauer DP, Eckman MH. Cost-effectiveness of latent tuberculosis screening before steroid therapy for idiopathic nephrotic syndrome in children. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61:22–32.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Shrestha RK, Mugisha B, Bunnell R, Mermin J, Odeke R, Madra P, et al. Cost-utility of tuberculosis prevention among HIV-infected adults in Kampala, Uganda. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2007;11:747–54.PubMed
29.
Linas BP, Wong AY, Freedberg KA, Horsburgh CR. Priorities for screening and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in the United States. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;184:590–601.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
30.
Burgos JL, Kahn JG, Strathdee SA, Valencia-Mendoza A, Bautista-Arredondo S, Laniado-Laborin R, et al. Targeted screening and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection using QuantiFERON-TB Gold is cost-effective in Mexico. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2009;13:962–8.PubMedCentralPubMed
31.
Khan K, Muennig P, Behta M, Zivin JG. Global Drug-resistance patterns and the management of latent tuberculosis infection in immigrants to the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1850–9.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Schackman BR, Goldie SJ, Freedberg KA, Losina E, Brazier J, Weinstein MC. Comparison of health state utilities using community and patient preference weights derived from a survey of patients with HIV/AIDS. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:27–38.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Li J, Munsiff SS, Tarantino T, Dorsinville M. Adherence to treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in a clinical population in New York City. Int J Infect Dis. 2010;14:e292–7.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Horsburgh CR, O’Donnell M, Chamblee S, Moreland JL, Johnson J, Marsh BJ, et al. Revisiting rates of reactivation tuberculosis: a population-based approach. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;182:420–5.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
35.
Lee SSJ, Chou KJ, Su IJ, Chen YS, Fang HC, Huang TS, et al. High prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in patients in end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis: comparison of QuantiFERON-TB GOLD, ELISPOT, and tuberculin skin test. Infection. 2009;37:96–102.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Shankar MSR, Aravindan AN, Sohal PM, Kohli HS, Sud K, Gupta KL, et al. The prevalence of tuberculin sensitivity and anergy in chronic renal failure in an endemic area: tuberculin test and the risk of post-transplant tuberculosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2005;20:2720–4.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Abdel-Nabi EA, Eissa SA, Soliman YMA, Amin WA. Quantiferon vs. tuberculin testing in detection of latent tuberculous infection among chronic renal failure patients. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc. 2014;63:161–5.CrossRef
38.
39.
Shiroiwa T, Sung Y-K, Fukuda T, Lang H-C, Bae S-C, Tsutani K. International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ. 2010;19:422–37.PubMedCrossRef
40.
41.
42.
43.
Azadi M, Bishai DM, Dowdy DW, Moulton LH, Cavalcante S, Saraceni V, et al. Cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis screening and isoniazid treatment in the TB/HIV in Rio (THRio) Study. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2014;18:1443–8.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Buxton MJ, Lacey LA, Feagan BG, Niecko T, Miller DW, Townsend RJ. Mapping from disease-specific measures to utility: an analysis of the relationships between the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire and Crohn’s Disease Activity Index in Crohn’s disease and measures of utility. Value Health. 2007;10:214–20.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Sauerland S, Weiner S, Dolezalova K, Angrisani L, Noguera CM, García-Caballero M, et al. Mapping utility scores from a disease-specific quality-of-life measure in bariatric surgery patients. Value Health. 2009;12:364–70.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Grimison PS, Simes RJ, Hudson HM, Stockler MR. Deriving a patient-based utility index from a cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire. Value Health. 2009;12:800–7.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Taylor Z, Nolan CM, Blumberg HM. American Thoracic Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Infectious Diseases Society of America. Controlling tuberculosis in the United States. Recommendations from the American Thoracic Society, CDC, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2005;54:1–81.PubMed
48.
49.
50.
51.
Nienhaus A, Schablon A, Costa JT, Diel R. Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:247.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
52.
Redelman-Sidi G, Sepkowitz KA. IFN-γ release assays in the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection among immunocompromised adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;188:422–31.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Oxlade O, Pinto M, Trajman A, Menzies D. How methodologic differences affect results of economic analyses: a systematic review of interferon gamma release assays for the diagnosis of LTBI. PLoS One. 2013;8:e56044.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
54.
Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, Offer R, Brazier JE, et al. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1571–82.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A Systematic Review of Studies Evaluating the Cost Utility of Screening High-Risk Populations for Latent Tuberculosis Infection
verfasst von
Jonathon R. Campbell
Thenuga Sasitharan
Fawziah Marra
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2015
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy / Ausgabe 4/2015
Print ISSN: 1175-5652
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-1896
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-015-0183-4