Spatially-targeted tuberculosis screening has limited impact beyond household contact tracing in Lima, Peru: A model-based analysis
0
by Joshua Havumaki, Joshua L. Warren, Jon Zelner, Nicolas A. Menzies, Roger Calderon, Carmen Contreras, Leonid Lecca, Mercedes C. Becerra, Megan Murray, Ted Cohen
Mathematical models have suggested that spatially-targeted screening interventions for tuberculosis may efficiently accelerate disease control, but empirical data supporting these findings are limited. Previous models demonstrating substantial impacts of these interventions have typically simulated large-scale screening efforts and have not attempted to capture the spatial distribution of tuberculosis in households and communities at a high resolution. Here, we calibrate an individual-based model to the locations of case notifications in one district of Lima, Peru. We estimate the incremental efficiency and impact of a spatially-targeted interventions used in combination with household contact tracing (HHCT). Our analysis reveals that HHCT is relatively efficient with a median of 40 (Interquartile Range: 31.7 to 49.9) household contacts required to be screened to detect a single case of active tuberculosis. However, HHCT has limited population impact, producing a median incidence reduction of only 3.7% (Interquartile Range: 5.8% to 1.9%) over 5 years. In comparison, spatially targeted screening (which we modeled as active case finding within high tuberculosis prevalence areas 100 m2 grid cell) is far less efficient, requiring evaluation of ≈12 times the number of individuals as HHCT to find a single individual with active tuberculosis. Furthermore, the addition of the spatially targeted screening effort produced only modest additional reductions in tuberculosis incidence over the 5 year period (≈1.3%) in tuberculosis incidence. In summary, we found that HHCT is an efficient approach for tuberculosis case finding, but has limited population impact. Other screening approaches which target areas of high tuberculosis prevalence are less efficient, and may have limited impact unless very large numbers of individuals can be screened.