Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27510248›Full record

Observational studyThe international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease2016

Higher cost of implementing Xpert(®) MTB/RIF in Ugandan peripheral settings: implications for cost-effectiveness.

E Hsiang, K M Little, P Haguma, C F Hanrahan, A Katamba, A Cattamanchi, J L Davis, A Vassall, D Dowdy

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluation of XpertmedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023
    Article
  9. Cost to perform door-to-door universal sputum screening for TB in a high-burden community.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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.

E HsiangJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
K M LittlePopulation Services International, Washington DC, USA.
P HagumaDepartment of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
C F HanrahanDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
A KatambaDepartment of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
A CattamanchiDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Curry International Tuberculosis Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
J L DavisDepartment of Epidemiology (Microbial Diseases), Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, USA; Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine Section, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
A VassallLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
D DowdyDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Comparative Effectiveness of Rapid TB Diagnostics in UgandaR21AI106031 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DOWDY, DAVID WESLEY · 2013 to 2014
$428k
NIAID NIH HHS R21 AI106031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

settingInitial cost-effectiveness evaluations of Xpert(®) MTB/RIF for tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis have not fully accounted for the realities of implementation in peripheral settings.

objectiveTo evaluate costs and diagnostic outcomes of Xpert testing implemented at various health care levels in Uganda.

designWe collected empirical cost data from five health centers utilizing Xpert for TB diagnosis, using an ingredients approach. We reviewed laboratory and patient records to assess outcomes at these sites and10 sites without Xpert. We also estimated incremental cost-effectiveness of Xpert testing; our primary outcome was the incremental cost of Xpert testing per newly detected TB case.

resultsThe mean unit cost of an Xpert test was US$21 based on a mean monthly volume of 54 tests per site, although unit cost varied widely (US$16-58) and was primarily determined by testing volume. Total diagnostic costs were 2.4-fold higher in Xpert clinics than in non-Xpert clinics; however, Xpert only increased diagnoses by 12%. The diagnostic costs of Xpert averaged US$119 per newly detected TB case, but were as high as US$885 at the center with the lowest volume of tests.

conclusionXpert testing can detect TB cases at reasonable cost, but may double diagnostic budgets for relatively small gains, with cost-effectiveness deteriorating with lower testing volumes.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAntitubercular AgentsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialEmpirical ResearchHumansRifampinSputumTuberculosis, Multidrug-ResistantUgandaUncertaintyAntitubercular AgentsRifampin

Identifiers

PMID27510248
PMCPMC5018405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.