Rapid molecular tests for tuberculosis and tuberculosis drug resistance: a qualitative evidence synthesis of recipient and provider views.
Nora Engel,Eleanor A Ochodo,Perpetua Wanjiku Karanja,Bey-Marrié Schmidt,Ricky Janssen,Karen R Steingart,Sandy Oliver
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014877.pub2
IF: 8.4
2022-04-28
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Abstract:Programmes that introduce rapid molecular tests for tuberculosis and tuberculosis drug resistance aim to bring tests closer to the community, and thereby cut delay in diagnosis, ensure early treatment, and improve health outcomes, as well as overcome problems with poor laboratory infrastructure and inadequately trained personnel. Yet, diagnostic technologies only have an impact if they are put to use in a correct and timely manner. Views of the intended beneficiaries are important in uptake of diagnostics, and their effective use also depends on those implementing testing programmes, including providers, laboratory professionals, and staff in health ministries. Otherwise, there is a risk these technologies will not fit their intended use and setting, cannot be made to work and scale up, and are not used by, or not accessible to, those in need. To synthesize end‐user and professional user perspectives and experiences with low‐complexity nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for detection of tuberculosis and tuberculosis drug resistance; and to identify implications for effective implementation and health equity. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Science Citation Index Expanded databases for eligible studies from 1 January 2007 up to 20 October 2021. We limited all searches to 2007 onward because the development of Xpert MTB/RIF, the first rapid molecular test in this review, was completed in 2009. We included studies that used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis, and were focused on perspectives and experiences of users and potential users of low‐complexity NAATs to diagnose tuberculosis and drug‐resistant tuberculosis. NAATs included Xpert MTB/RIF, Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra, Xpert MTB/XDR, and the Truenat assays. Users were people with presumptive or confirmed tuberculosis and drug‐resistant tuberculosis (including multidrug‐resistant (MDR‐TB)) and their caregivers, healthcare providers, laboratory technicians and managers, and programme officers and staff; and were from any type of health facility and setting globally. MDR‐TB is tuberculosis caused by resistance to at least rifampicin and isoniazid, the two most effective first‐line drugs used to treat tuberculosis. We used a thematic analysis approach for data extraction and synthesis, and assessed confidence in the findings using GRADE CERQual approach. We developed a conceptual framework to illustrate how the findings relate. We found 32 studies. All studies were conducted in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Twenty‐seven studies were conducted in high‐tuberculosis burden countries and 21 studies in high‐MDR‐TB burden countries. Only one study was from an Eastern European country. While the studies covered a diverse use of low‐complexity NAATs, in only a minority of studies was it used as the initial diagnostic test for all people with presumptive tuberculosis. We identified 18 review findings and grouped them into three overarching categories. Critical aspects users value People with tuberculosis valued reaching diagnostic closure with an accurate diagnosis, avoiding diagnostic delays, and keeping diagnostic‐associated cost low. Similarly, healthcare providers valued aspects of accuracy and the resulting confidence in low‐complexity NAAT results, rapid turnaround times, and keeping cost to people seeking a diagnosis low. In addition, providers valued diversity of sample types (for example, gastric aspirate specimens and stool in children) and drug resistance information. Laboratory professionals appreciated the improved ease of use, ergonomics, and biosafety of low‐complexity NAATs compared to sputum microscopy, and increased staff satisfaction. Challenges reported to realizing those values People with tuberculosis and healthcare workers were reluctant to test for tuberculosis (including MDR‐TB) due to fears, stigma, or cost concerns. Thus, low‐complexity NAAT testing is not implemented with sufficient support or discretion to overcome barriers that are common to other approaches to testing for tuberculosis. Delays were reported at many steps of the diagnostic pathway owing to poor sample quality; difficulties with transporting specimens; lack of sufficient resources; maintenance of low‐complexity NAATs; increased workload; inefficient work and patient flows; over‐reliance on low‐complexity NAAT results in lieu of clinical judgement; and lack of data‐driven and inclusive implementation processes. These challenges were reported to lead to underutilization. Concerns for access and equity The reported concerns included sustainable funding and maintenance and equitable use of resources to access low‐complexity NAATs, as well as conflicts of interest between donors and people implementing the tests. Also, lengthy diagnostic delays, underutilization of low‐complexity NAATs, lack of tuberculosis diagnostic facilities in the community, and too many -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal