Cost-effectiveness of Using Quantiferon Gold (QFT-G)® versus Tuberculin Skin Test (TST) among U.S. and Foreign Born Populations at a Public Health Department Clinic with a Low Prevalence of Tuberculosis

Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the cost benefit to routinely using QFT‐G versus the standard TST for screening U.S. and foreign born populations at a public health department clinic with a low prevalence of tuberculosis. Design and Sample A comparative cost analysis of the mone...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Public health Nursing 2014-03, Vol.31 (2), p.144-152
Main Authors: Iqbal, Ayesha Z., Leighton, Jenelle, Anthony, John, Knaup, Richard C., Peters, Eleanor B., Bailey, Thomas C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Comparative analysis
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Cost-effectiveness
Emigration and Immigration - statistics & numerical data
Female
Health care expenditures
Humans
LTBI
Male
Medical screening
Middle Aged
Nursing
Prevalence
Public health
Public Health - economics
screening
Sensitivity and Specificity
TST
Tuberculin Test - economics
Tuberculin Test - methods
Tuberculosis
Tuberculosis - diagnosis
Tuberculosis - epidemiology
United States - epidemiology
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the cost benefit to routinely using QFT‐G versus the standard TST for screening U.S. and foreign born populations at a public health department clinic with a low prevalence of tuberculosis. Design and Sample A comparative cost analysis of the monetization between QFT‐G and TST was conducted: Data from the health department's Chest Clinic patients seen in 2007 were used to model cost predictions. Measures The net costs of screening, x‐rays, the standard 9 months of latent tuberculosis infection treatment, laboratory, and administration for U.S. born patients and foreign born patients were investigated. Results There are no apparent cost savings for U.S. born individuals, but due to the higher specificity of QFT‐G for foreign born BCG‐vaccinated individuals, there are unnecessary expenditures associated with the higher number of false positives incurred when using TST compared with QFT‐G on 1,000 foreign born individuals (69%, 18%). Conclusion QFT‐G is cost‐effective and should be used at local health department clinics that want to achieve savings in screening and treating those suspected of having TB infection, especially for high‐risk populations such as foreign born individuals.
ISSN:0737-1209
1525-1446
DOI:10.1111/phn.12083