The aim of the present study was to compare the direct costs of three models for detection of @entity9178 ( @entity9178 ) in routine clinical practice in Switzerland. Comparison of the overall costs of screening for @entity9178 , including medical and radiological examination, and preventive treatment associated with three screening models was carried out. Model 1 relies only on the @entity272 ( @entity272 ) according to the current national guidelines, model 2 relies on T-SPOT. @entity1906 (Oxford Immunotec, Oxford, UK) only and model 3 relies on @entity272 followed by confirmation of positive results by T-SPOT. @entity1906 . Costs were taken directly from the clinic's figures. Clinical assumptions were based on the 267 @entity1 who were referred to the clinic over the study period. Model 3 was found to be the most cost-effective. Using only the skin @entity1062 (model 1) was the least cost-effective. If only one @entity1062 for @entity9178 is to be used, then model 2 (using T-SPOT. @entity1906 only) is cheaper than using the @entity272 (model 1). Screening for @entity9178 by @entity272 followed by confirmation with T-SPOT. @entity1906 is less costly than screening with @entity272 alone, as it allows a reduction in the number of @entity1 who receive preventive treatment. In groups with a high proportion of negative tuberculin skin tests, screening with T-SPOT. @entity1906 @entity1062 only may be the most cost-effective.

Direct costs of three models for the screening of XXXX .

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'people'] @entity9178 :: ('MESH:D055985', 'Disease') :: ['LTBI', 'latent tuberculosis infection'] @entity1906 :: ('MESH:D014390', 'Disease') :: ['TB'] @entity1062 :: ('MESH:D013736', 'Disease') :: ['test'] @entity272 :: ('MESH:D012871', 'Disease') :: ['tuberculin skin test', 'TST']
@entity9178 :: (MESH:D055985,Disease) :: ['latent tuberculosis infection']
