No abstract

Background Indigenous peoples worldwide carry a disproportionate tuberculosis burden. There is an increasing awareness of the effect of social determinants and proximate determinants such as alcohol use, overcrowding, type 1 and type 2 diabetes, substance misuse, HIV, food insecurity and malnutrition, and smoking on the burden of tuberculosis. We aimed to understand the potential contribution of such determinants to tuberculosis in Indigenous peoples and to document steps taken to address them. MethodsWe did a systematic review using seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library). We identified English language articles published from Jan 1, 1980, to Dec 20, 2017, reporting the prevalence of proximate determinants of tuberculosis and preventive programmes targeting these determinants in Indigenous communities worldwide. We included any randomised controlled trials, controlled studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case reports, and qualitative research. Exclusion criteria were articles in languages other than English, full text not available, population was not Indigenous, focused exclusively on children or older people, and studies that focused on pharmacological interventions.Findings Of 34 255 articles identified, 475 were eligible for inclusion. Most studies confirmed a higher prevalence of proximate determinants in Indigenous communities than in the general population. Diabetes was more frequent in Indigenous communities within high-income countries versus in low-income countries. The prevalence of alcohol use was generally similar to that among non-Indigenous groups, although patterns of drinking often differed. Smoking prevalence and smokeless tobacco consumption were commonly higher in Indigenous groups than in non-Indigenous groups. Food insecurity was highly prevalent in most Indigenous communities evaluated. Substance use was more frequent in Indigenous inhabitants of high-income countries than of low-income countries, with wide variation across Indigenous communities. The literature pertaining to HIV, crowding, and housing conditions among Indigenous peoples was too scant to draw firm conclusions. Preventive programmes that are culturally appropriate targeting these determinants appear feasible, although their effectiveness is largely unproven.Interpretation Indigenous peoples were generally reported to have a higher prevalence of several proximate determinants of tuberculosis than non-Indigenous peoples, with wide variation across Indigenous communities. These findings emphasise the need for community-led, culturally appropriate strategies to address smoking, food insecurity, and diabetes in Indigenous populations as important public health goals in their own right, and also to reduce the burden of tuberculosis.

BackgroundIn North America, tuberculosis incidence is now very low and risk to healthcare workers has fallen. Indeed, recent cohort data question routine annual tuberculosis screening in this context. We compared the cost-effectiveness of three potential strategies for ongoing screening of North American healthcare workers at risk of exposure. The analysis did not evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening at hiring, and considered only workers with negative baseline tests.MethodsA decision analysis model simulated a hypothetical cohort of 1000 workers following negative baseline tests, considering duties, tuberculosis exposure, testing and treatment. Two tests were modelled, the tuberculin skin test (TST) and QuantiFERON®-TB-Gold In-Tube (QFT). Three screening strategies were compared: (1) annual screening, where workers were tested yearly; (2) targeted screening, where workers with high-risk duties (e.g. respiratory therapy) were tested yearly and other workers only after recognised exposure; and (3) post exposure-only screening, where all workers were tested only after recognised exposure. Workers with high-risk duties had 1% annual risk of infection, while workers with standard patient care duties had 0.3%. In an alternate higher-risk scenario, the corresponding annual risks of infection were 3% and 1%, respectively. We projected costs, morbidity, quality-adjusted survival and mortality over 20 years after hiring. The analysis used the healthcare system perspective and a 3% annual discount rate.ResultsOver 20 years, annual screening with TST yielded an expected 2.68 active tuberculosis cases/1000 workers, versus 2.83 for targeted screening and 3.03 for post-exposure screening only. In all cases, annual screening was associated with poorer quality-adjusted survival, i.e. lost quality-adjusted life years, compared to targeted or post-exposure screening only. The annual TST screening strategy yielded an incremental cost estimate of $1,717,539 per additional case prevented versus targeted TST screening, which in turn cost an incremental $426,678 per additional case prevented versus post-exposure TST screening only. With the alternate “higher-risk” scenario, the annual TST strategy cost an estimated $426,678 per additional case prevented versus the targeted TST strategy, which cost an estimated $52,552 per additional case prevented versus post-exposure TST screening only. In all cases, QFT was more expensive than TST, with no or limited added benefit. Sensitivity analysis suggested that, even with limited exposure recognition, annual screening was poorly cost-effective.ConclusionsFor most North American healthcare workers, annual tuberculosis screening appears poorly cost-effective. Reconsideration of screening practices is warranted.

No abstract