dc.date.accessioned2022-01-18T19:34:37Z
dc.date.available2022-01-18T19:34:37Z
dc.date.created2022-01-18T19:34:37Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/11061
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001120
dc.description.abstractBackground: Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) is a promising new rapid diagnostic technology for tuberculosis (TB) that has characteristics that suggest large-scale roll-out. However, because the test is expensive, there are concerns among TB program managers and policy makers regarding its affordability for low- and middle-income settings. Methods and Findings: We estimate the impact of the introduction of Xpert on the costs and cost-effectiveness of TB care using decision analytic modelling, comparing the introduction of Xpert to a base case of smear microscopy and clinical diagnosis in India, South Africa, and Uganda. The introduction of Xpert increases TB case finding in all three settings; from 72%-85% to 95%-99% of the cohort of individuals with suspected TB, compared to the base case. Diagnostic costs (including the costs of testing all individuals with suspected TB) also increase: from US$28-US$49 to US$133-US$146 and US$137-US$151 per TB case detected when Xpert is used "in addition to" and "as a replacement of" smear microscopy, respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for using Xpert "in addition to" smear microscopy, compared to the base case, range from US$41-$110 per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Likewise the ICERS for using Xpert "as a replacement of" smear microscopy range from US$52-$138 per DALY averted. These ICERs are below the World Health Organization (WHO) willingness to pay threshold. Conclusions: Our results suggest that Xpert is a cost-effective method of TB diagnosis, compared to a base case of smear microscopy and clinical diagnosis of smear-negative TB in low- and middle-income settings where, with its ability to substantially increase case finding, it has important potential for improving TB diagnosis and control. The extent of cost-effectiveness gain to TB programmes from deploying Xpert is primarily dependent on current TB diagnostic practices. Further work is required during scale-up to validate these findings.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherPublic Library of Science
dc.relationPLoS Medicine
dc.relation1549-1676
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectcohort analysis
dc.subjectCohort Studies
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectdiagnostic test
dc.subjecthealth care policy
dc.subjectrifampicin
dc.subjectmethodology
dc.subjectSouth Africa
dc.subjectdeveloping country
dc.subjectculture medium
dc.subjectbacterium culture
dc.subjecteconomics
dc.subjecthealth care cost
dc.subjectlung tuberculosis
dc.subjectTuberculosis, Pulmonary
dc.subjectUganda
dc.subjectmultidrug resistant tuberculosis
dc.subjectthorax radiography
dc.subjectcost effectiveness analysis
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysis
dc.subjectworld health organization
dc.subjectsmear
dc.subjectantibiotic sensitivity
dc.subjectcost benefit analysis
dc.subjectlowest income group
dc.subjectIndia
dc.subjectClinical Laboratory Techniques
dc.subjectHuman immunodeficiency virus prevalence
dc.subjectquality adjusted life year
dc.subjecttuberculosis control
dc.subjectdiagnostic procedures
dc.titleRapid diagnosis of tuberculosis with the Xpert MTB/RIF assay in high burden countries: A cost-effectiveness analysis
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución