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

Abstract

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.

A scoping review of cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection in migrants from high-incidence countries

“… All with or without CXR port of entry. Iqbal et al (USA, 2014) [ 22 ] 1. QFT; Administrative data base (2007) CEA Government health care payer Decision model Health Direct Screening, CXR, Treatments, lab tests and diagnostics, physicians’ and staff time.…”

Estimated Prevalence of Tuberculosis Infection Among a New York City Clinic Population Using Interferon-gamma Release Assays

“…Several studies have concluded that IGRAs are cost-effective compared with TST, particularly in settings with a large, high-risk foreign-born population [ 20 – 22 ]. In NYC TB clinics, the reduction in the proportion of the population testing positive likely resulted in resource savings.…”

Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for interferon-γ release assays and tuberculin skin test in tuberculous uveitis

“…These cost-effectiveness results remain robust to this change and in particular, the dual-test strategy remains cost effective compared with the TST with an ICER of $13 000 per QALY gained (table 2). Finally, to improve the external validity of our study we took into consideration that IGRA in Singapore is seven times as expensive as the TST (ie, $156 vs $22), while in other countries the IGRA is normally threefold more expensive than the TST 15 27. However, even when we lowered the cost of the IGRA to a level comparable with that in the literature, the dual strategy remained cost effective (table 2).…”