Format

Send to:

Choose Destination

Similar articles for PubMed (Select 23457502)

See comment in PubMed Commons below
PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56074. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056074. Epub 2013 Feb 15.

A systematic review of reported cost for smear and culture tests during multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment.

Author information

  • 1Division of Global Equity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America. Chunling_Lu@hms.harvard.edu

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

In 2011, World Health Organization revised its recommendation for microbiological monitoring during treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) by increasing the frequency of culture examination from quarterly to monthly after culture conversion. Implementing the recommendation requires substantial additional investment in laboratory infrastructure. The objective of this review is to provide cost evidence that is needed for national TB programs to budget for optimal monitoring strategies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS:

WE CONDUCTED THE FIRST SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW ON UNIT COST ESTIMATES OF THREE MONITORING STRATEGIES: 1) smear only; 2) culture only; 3) combined smear and culture. 26 peer-reviewed studies were selected by searching 10 databases in English and Chinese for literature published between 1995 and 2012. Cost estimates were converted into 2010 constant USD and international dollars. We assessed the quality of the estimates using a matrix with five essential elements and provided a cost projection for the combined smear and culture tests where the data were available. The 26 studies reported the cost estimates in 16 predominantly high- or middle-income countries from 1993 to 2009. The estimated unit cost for smear, culture, and combined tests ranges from $0.26 to $10.50, $1.63 to $62.01, and $26.73 to $39.57, respectively. The ratio of culture to smear costs varies from 1.35 to 11.98. The wide range of estimates is likely attributable to using different laboratory methods in different regions and years and differing practices in collecting and reporting cost data. Most studies did not report information critical for generalizing their conclusions.

CONCLUSION:

The paucity and low quality of unit cost estimates for TB monitoring in resource-poor settings impose technical challenges in predicting the resources needed for strengthening microbiological monitoring. To improve the validity and comparability of the cost data, we strongly advocate the data collection, estimation, and reporting follow protocols proposed by WHO.

PMID:
23457502
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3574085
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Public Library of Science Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk