IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0004724.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decentralized TB diagnostic testing with Truenat MTB Plus and MTB-RIF Dx vs. hub-and-spoke GeneXpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Mozambique and Tanzania: a cost and cost-effectiveness analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Akash Malhotra
  • Délio Elísio
  • Antonio Machiana
  • Anange Lwilla
  • Jerry Hella
  • Neenah Young
  • Celso Khosa
  • Marta Cossa
  • Dinis Nguenha
  • Regino Mgaya
  • Dionisia Balate
  • Mikaela Watson
  • Vinzeigh Leukes
  • Lelisa Fekadu
  • Saima Bashir
  • Adam Penn-Nicholson
  • Morten Ruhwald
  • Leyla Larsson
  • Monisha Sharma
  • Katharina Kranzer
  • Claudia M Denkinger
  • David Dowdy
  • on behalf of the T.B. CAPT consortium

Abstract

In low-and middle-income countries, missed or delayed tuberculosis (TB) diagnoses contribute to avoidable morbidity, mortality, and transmission. Decentralized testing platforms, such as the Molbio Truenat, may offer solutions by providing accurate point-of-care testing, improving access, and lowering out-of-pocket costs. Despite these advantages, the overall cost and cost-effectiveness of identifying additional TB cases using the Truenat MTB assays remain inadequately explored and understood. We collected economic data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial of TB testing using decentralized Molbio Truenat platform with MTB Plus and MTB-RIF Dx assays (Truenat MTB assays) versus hub-and-spoke Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (standard of care) in Tanzania and Mozambique (TB-CAPT Core trial). We estimated facility-based diagnostic cost per participant tested and incremental facility-based diagnostic cost per incremental participant initiating TB treatment within seven and sixty days from enrolment. We used the societal perspective and conducted sensitivity analyses to determine key drivers of cost-effectiveness. The facility-based diagnostic cost per participant initiating treatment within seven days from enrolment in Mozambique was $853(95% uncertainty range: $707, $1072) for hub-and-spoke testing and $690($588, $823) for decentralized testing; in Tanzania costs were $596($485, $746) for hub-and-spoke testing and $592($495, $715) for decentralized testing. At sixty days, costs per treatment initiation were $581($493, $706) for hub-and-spoke vs. $678($576, $811) for decentralized testing in Mozambique, and $391($324, $476) vs. $591($494, $716) in Tanzania. Comparing decentralized to hub-and-spoke testing, the incremental cost per incremental seven-day treatment initiation was $403(-$103, $941) in Mozambique and $580($167, $1638) in Tanzania, and $805(-$10107, $10560) and -$353(-$20299, $20802) for sixty-day treatment initiation, respectively. Utilization (i.e., testing volume) of decentralized equipment was the strongest driver of cost-effectiveness. Decentralized TB testing with Truenat MTB assays is cost-effective relative to hub-and-spoke testing in Mozambique and Tanzania.

Suggested Citation

  • Akash Malhotra & Délio Elísio & Antonio Machiana & Anange Lwilla & Jerry Hella & Neenah Young & Celso Khosa & Marta Cossa & Dinis Nguenha & Regino Mgaya & Dionisia Balate & Mikaela Watson & Vinzeigh L, 2025. "Decentralized TB diagnostic testing with Truenat MTB Plus and MTB-RIF Dx vs. hub-and-spoke GeneXpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Mozambique and Tanzania: a cost and cost-effectiveness analysis," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(5), pages 1-12, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0004724
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004724
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0004724
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0004724&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004724?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0004724. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.