Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25079599›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A comparison of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment commencement times in MDRTBPlus line probe assay and Xpert® MTB/RIF-based algorithms in a routine operational setting in Cape Town.

Pren Naidoo, Elizabeth du Toit, Rory Dunbar, Carl Lombard, Judy Caldwell, Anne Detjen, S Bertel Squire, Donald A Enarson, Nulda Beyers

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Time to treatment for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Performance of XpertPublic health action · 2020
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Pren NaidooDesmond Tutu TB Centre, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Elizabeth du ToitDesmond Tutu TB Centre, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Rory DunbarDesmond Tutu TB Centre, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Carl LombardMedical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
Judy CaldwellCape Town Health Directorate, Cape Town, South Africa.
Anne DetjenThe International Union Against TB and Lung Disease, Paris, France.
S Bertel SquireLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Donald A EnarsonThe International Union Against TB and Lung Disease, Paris, France.
Nulda BeyersDesmond Tutu TB Centre, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundXpert MTB/RIF was introduced as a screening test for all presumptive tuberculosis cases in primary health services in Cape Town, South Africa. STUDY

aimTo compare multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment commencement times in MDRTBPlus Line Probe Assay and Xpert MTB/RIF-based algorithms in a routine operational setting.

methodsThe study was undertaken in 10 of 29 high tuberculosis burden primary health facilities, selected through stratified random sampling. An observational study was undertaken as facilities transitioned to the Xpert MTB/RIF-based algorithm. MDR-TB diagnostic data were collected from electronic laboratory records and treatment data from clinical records and registers. Kaplan Meier time-to-event analysis was used to compare treatment commencement time, laboratory turnaround time and action delay between algorithms. A facility-level paired analysis was done: the median time-to-event was estimated per facility in each algorithm and mean differences between algorithms compared using a paired t-test. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the effect of patient-level variables on treatment commencement time. The difference between algorithms was compared using the hazard ratio.

resultsThe median treatment commencement time in the Xpert MTB/RIF-based algorithm was 17 days (95% CI 13 to 22 days), with a median laboratory turnaround time (to result available in the laboratory) of <1 day (95% CI<1 to 1 day). There was a decrease of 25 days (95% CI 17 to 32 days, p<0.001) in median MDR-TB treatment commencement time in the Xpert MTB/RIF-based algorithm. We found no significant effect on treatment commencement times for the patient-level variables assessed.

conclusionMDR-TB treatment commencement time was significantly reduced in the Xpert MTB/RIF-based algorithm. Changes in the health system may have contributed. However, an unacceptable level of delay remains. Health system and patient factors contributing to delay need to be evaluated and addressed to optimise test benefits.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAntitubercular AgentsHumansSouth AfricaTuberculosis, Multidrug-ResistantAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

PMID25079599
PMCPMC4117508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.