Abstract
Background Many patients in sub-Saharan Africa whom a diagnosis of tuberculosis is considered are subsequently not diagnosed with tuberculosis. The proportion of patients this represents, and their alternative diagnoses, have not previously been systematically reviewed.
Methods We searched four databases from inception to April 27, 2020, without language restrictions (PROSPERO: CRD42018100004). We included all adult pulmonary tuberculosis diagnostic studies from sub-Saharan Africa, excluding case series and inpatient studies. We extracted the proportion of patients with presumed tuberculosis subsequently not diagnosed with tuberculosis and any alternative diagnoses received. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to obtain pooled estimates stratified by passive and active case finding.
Results Our search identified 1799 studies, of which 18 studies with 14527 participants from 10 African countries were included. The proportion of patients with presumed tuberculosis subsequently not diagnosed with tuberculosis was 48.5% (95% CI 38.4-56.7) in passive and 92.7% (95% CI 83.1-97.0) in active case finding studies. This proportion increased with declining numbers of clinically diagnosed tuberculosis cases. Past history of tuberculosis was documented in only 55% of studies, with just five out of 18 reporting any alternative diagnoses.
Discussion Nearly half of all patients with presumed tuberculosis in sub-Saharan Africa do not have a final diagnosis of active tuberculosis. This proportion may be higher when active case finding strategies are used. Little is known about the healthcare needs of these patients. Research is required to better characterise these patient populations and plan health system solutions that meet their needs.
Funding NIHR, UK MRC
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
We thank the NIHR Global Health Research Unit on Lung Health and tuberculosis in Africa at LSTM - IMPALA for helping to make this work possible. In relation to IMPALA (grant number 16/136/35) specifically: This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (IMPALA, grant reference 16/136/35) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care. PJD was supported by a fellowship from the UK Medical Research Council (MR/P022081/1); this UK funded award is part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union. SJ was supported by an NIHR Clinical Lectureship Award.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Systematic Review of published studies
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Joint senior authors
Data Availability
The protocol for this systematic review is available on PROSPERO: : CRD42018100004
