The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2016
Comparing laboratory costs of smear/culture and Xpert® MTB/RIF-based tuberculosis diagnostic algorithms.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Naidoo P, Dunbar R, du Toit E, van Niekerk M, Squire S B, Beyers N, Madan J
Аннотация
SETTING: Cape Town, South Africa, where Xpert® MTB/RIF was introduced as a screening test for all presumptive tuberculosis (TB) cases.
OBJECTIVE: To compare laboratory costs of smear/culture- and Xpert-based tuberculosis (TB) diagnostic algorithms in routine operational conditions.
METHODS: Economic costing was undertaken from a laboratory perspective, using an ingredients-based costing approach. Cost allocation was based on reviews of standard operating procedures and laboratory records, timing of test procedures, measurement of laboratory areas and manager interviews. We analysed laboratory test data to assess overall costs and cost per pulmonary TB and multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) case diagnosed. Costs were expressed as 2013 Consumer Price Index-adjusted values.
RESULTS: Total TB diagnostic costs increased by 43%, from US$440 967 in the smear/culture-based algorithm (April-June 2011) to US$632 262 in the Xpert-based algorithm (April-June 2013). The cost per TB case diagnosed increased by 157%, from US$48.77 (n = 1601) to US$125.32 (n = 1281). The total cost per MDR-TB case diagnosed was similar, at US$190.14 and US$183.86, with 95 and 107 cases diagnosed in the respective algorithms.
CONCLUSION: The introduction of the Xpert-based algorithm resulted in substantial cost increases. This was not matched by the expected increase in TB diagnostic efficacy, calling into question the sustainability of this expensive new technology.
OBJECTIVE: To compare laboratory costs of smear/culture- and Xpert-based tuberculosis (TB) diagnostic algorithms in routine operational conditions.
METHODS: Economic costing was undertaken from a laboratory perspective, using an ingredients-based costing approach. Cost allocation was based on reviews of standard operating procedures and laboratory records, timing of test procedures, measurement of laboratory areas and manager interviews. We analysed laboratory test data to assess overall costs and cost per pulmonary TB and multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) case diagnosed. Costs were expressed as 2013 Consumer Price Index-adjusted values.
RESULTS: Total TB diagnostic costs increased by 43%, from US$440 967 in the smear/culture-based algorithm (April-June 2011) to US$632 262 in the Xpert-based algorithm (April-June 2013). The cost per TB case diagnosed increased by 157%, from US$48.77 (n = 1601) to US$125.32 (n = 1281). The total cost per MDR-TB case diagnosed was similar, at US$190.14 and US$183.86, with 95 and 107 cases diagnosed in the respective algorithms.
CONCLUSION: The introduction of the Xpert-based algorithm resulted in substantial cost increases. This was not matched by the expected increase in TB diagnostic efficacy, calling into question the sustainability of this expensive new technology.