 |
 |

COMMENTS AND OPINIONS
Cost-effectiveness of Tuberculosis Screening in Health Care Workers Is Not Robust
James Mancuso, MD, MPH;
David Niebuhr, MD, MPH;
Margot R. Krauss, MD, MPH;
Clifton Dabbs, DO;
Katherine Anderson, PhD
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
We read with interest the article by de Perio et al1 regarding the cost-effectiveness of screening for latent tuberculosis in health care workers. We commend their analysis of an important topic and find most of the analysis and results reasonable. However, readers should be cautioned that several of the assumptions used in their model are inconsistent with more recently published data.2 These differences may invalidate some of their conclusions that new blood tests for tuberculosis are both "more effective and less costly" than tuberculin skin testing (TST).
Of greatest concern is the assumption that the currently marketed QuantiFERON-TB Gold in Tube (QFT-GIT) (Cellestis Limited, Carnegie, Australia) has a higher sensitivity than the TST. The 2008 meta-analysis by Pai and colleagues2 captured a more robust and representative set of estimates than those . . . [Full Text of this Article] AUTHOR INFORMATION
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Cost-effectiveness of Interferon Gamma Release Assays vs Tuberculin Skin Tests in Health Care Workers
Marie A. de Perio, Joel Tsevat, Gary A. Roselle, Stephen M. Kralovic, and Mark H. Eckman
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(2):179-187.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED LETTER
Cost-effectiveness of Tuberculosis Screening in Health Care Workers Is Not Robust—Reply
Marie A. de Perio, Joel Tsevat, Gary A. Roselle, Stephen M. Kralovic, and Mark H. Eckman
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(14):1336-1337.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|