ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Cost-Effectiveness of Annual Screening for Tuberculosis among Italian Healthcare Workers: A Retrospective Study.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies for Tuberculosis Prevention in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
- Article
- Risk of latent tuberculosis infection among healthcare workers in Italy: a retrospective study with Quantiferon Test.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the past few years, healthcare workers (HCWs) have been considered at higher risk for tuberculosis (TB) infection than the general population. On the other hand, recent studies have reported a low conversion rate among these workers. Recently, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) updated its recommendations, suggesting that an annual screening should not be performed in the absence of a documented exposure but only in workers with high-risk duties or with job tasks in settings at high risk of tuberculosis contagion (e.g., departments of infectious or pulmonary diseases). In fact, some studies showed that annual tuberculosis screening for all the HCWs was not cost-effective in countries with a low incidence of TB. In this study, we evaluated the conversion rate and the cost-effectiveness of two different tuberculosis screening strategies in a large population of Italian HCWs.
methodsIn our retrospective study, we reviewed data coming from a tuberculosis screening conducted on 1451 HCWs in a teaching hospital of Rome. All workers were evaluated annually by means of the Quantiferon test (QFT) for a five-year period. Then, the conversion rate was calculated.
resultsWe found a cumulative conversion rate of 0.6%. Considering the cost of the QFT test (48.26 euros per person), the screening of the HCWs resulted in a high financial burden (38,902.90 euros per seroconversion). Only one seroconversion would have been missed by applying the CDC updated recommendations, with a relevant drop of the costs: 6756.40 euros per seroconversion, with a global save of 296,075.10 euros.
conclusionThe risk of TB conversion among our study population was extremely low and it was related to the risk classification of the setting. Giving these results, the annual tuberculosis screening appeared to not be cost effective. We conclude that a targeted screening would be a better alternative in HCWs with a higher risk of TB exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.