A comparision of the yield of three tuberculosis screening modalities among people living with HIV: a retrospective quasi-experiemental study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorKakinda, Michael
dc.contributor.authorMatovu, Joseph K. B.
dc.contributor.authorObuku, Ekwaro A.
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-25T13:26:37Z
dc.date.available2018-07-25T13:26:37Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.descriptionThis study explored Intensified Case Finding (ICF) tool which was approved for TB screening in 2011; however there is still paucity of robust data comparing yields of the different ICF screening modalities.en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: The Intensified Case Finding (ICF) tool was approved for TB screening in 2011; however there is still paucity of robust data comparing yields of the different ICF screening modalities. We compared yields of three different screening modalities for TB among Patients Living with HIV (PLHIV) in Uganda in order to inform National TB Programs on the most effective TB screening method. Methods: This was a retrospective quasi-experimental study conducted at an Out-Patient HIV/AIDS clinic in Uganda. We set out to determine yields of three different TB screening modalities at three time periods: 2006/07 where Passive Case Finding (PCF) was used. Here, no screening questions were administered; the clinician depended on the patient’s self-report. In 2008/09 embedded Intensified Case Finding Tool (e-ICF) was used; here a data capture field was added to the patient clinical encounter forms to compel clinicians to screen for TBsymptoms. In 2010/11 Independent Intensified Case Finding Tool (i-ICF) was used; here a screening data collection form, was used, it had the same screening questions as e-ICF. Routine clinical data, including TB status, were collected and entered into an electronic clinical care database. Analysis was done in STATA and the main outcome estimated was the proportional yield of TB cases for each screening modality. Results: The overall yield of TB cases was 11.18 % over the entire period of the study (2006 – 2011). The intervention–specific yields were 1.86 % for PCF, 14.95 % for e-ICF and 12.47 % for i-ICF. Use of either e–ICF (OR:9.2, 95 % CI: 4.81-17.73) or i– ICF (OR: 7.7, 95 % CI: 4.02-14.78) significantly detected more TB cases compared to PCF (P <0.001). While the yields of the Active Case Finding modalities (e-ICF & i-ICF) were not significantly different (OR: 0.98, 95 % CI 0.76-1.27, P = 0.89). Conclusion: The active screening modalities (e-ICF & i-ICF) had a comparable TB yield and were eight to nine times more efficient in identifying TB cases when compared to the PCF. Cost effectiveness studies would be informative.en_US
dc.identifier.citationKakinda et al. A comparision of the yield of three tuberculosis screening modalities among people living with HIV: a retrospective quasi-experiemental study. BMC Public Health Vol. 16 Issue: 1080 (2016) DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3763-9en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11951/293
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBMC Public Healthen_US
dc.subjectIntensified - HIV/AIDSen_US
dc.subjectHIV/AIDS - Ugandaen_US
dc.titleA comparision of the yield of three tuberculosis screening modalities among people living with HIV: a retrospective quasi-experiemental studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Kakinda et al._A comparision of the yield of three tuberculosis screening modalities among people living with HIV. 2016.pdf
Size:
472.97 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in BMC Public Health Vol. 16 Issue: 1080 (2016). All rights reserved.
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.97 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
UCU School of Medicine