Drew L. Posey

A comparative examination of tuberculosis immigration medical screening programs from selected countries with high immigration and low tuberculosis incidence rates

BackgroundTuberculosis (TB) in migrants is an ongoing challenge in several low TB incidence countries since a large proportion of TB in these countries occurs in migrants from high incidence countries. To meet these challenges, several countries utilize TB screening programs. The programs attempt to identify and treat those with active and/or infectious stages of the disease. In addition, screening is used to identify and manage those with latent or inactive disease after arrival. Between nations, considerable variation exists in the methods used in migration-associated TB screening. The present study aimed to compare the TB immigration medical examination requirements in selected countries of high immigration and low TB incidence rates.MethodsDescriptive study of immigration TB screening programsResults16 out of 18 eligible countries responded to the written standardized survey and phone interview. Comparisons in specific areas of TB immigration screening programs included authorities responsible for TB screening, the primary objectives of the TB screening program, the yield of detection of active TB disease, screening details and aspects of follow up for inactive pulmonary TB. No two countries had the same approach to TB screening among migrants. Important differences, common practices, common problems, evidence or lack of evidence for program specifics were noted.ConclusionsIn spite of common goals, there is great diversity in the processes and practices designed to mitigate the impact of migration-associated TB among nations that screen migrants for the disease. The long-term goal in decreasing migration-related introduction of TB from high to low incidence countries remains diminishing the prevalence of the disease in those high incidence locations. In the meantime, existing or planned migration screening programs for TB can be made more efficient and evidenced based. Cooperation among countries doing research in the areas outlined in this study should facilitate the development of improved screening programs.

Estimating the impact of newly arrived foreign-born persons on tuberculosis in the United States.

Background Among approximately 163.5 million foreign-born persons admitted to the United States annually, only 500,000 immigrants and refugees are required to undergo overseas tuberculosis (TB) screening. It is unclear what extent of the unscreened nonimmigrant visitors contributes to the burden of foreign-born TB in the United States. Methodology/Principal Findings We defined foreign-born persons within 1 year after arrival in the United States as “newly arrived”, and utilized data from U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and World Health Organization to estimate the incidence of TB among newly arrived foreign-born persons in the United States. During 2001 through 2008, 11,500 TB incident cases, including 291 multidrug-resistant TB incident cases, were estimated to occur among 20,989,738 person-years for the 1,479,542,654 newly arrived foreign-born persons in the United States. Of the 11,500 estimated TB incident cases, 41.6% (4,783) occurred among immigrants and refugees, 36.6% (4,211) among students/exchange visitors and temporary workers, 13.8% (1,589) among tourists and business travelers, and 7.3% (834) among Canadian and Mexican nonimmigrant visitors without an I-94 form (e.g., arrival-departure record). The top 3 newly arrived foreign-born populations with the largest estimated TB incident cases per 100,000 admissions were immigrants and refugees from high-incidence countries (e.g., 2008 WHO-estimated TB incidence rate of ≥100 cases/100,000 population/year; 235.8 cases/100,000 admissions, 95% confidence interval [CI], 228.3 to 243.3), students/exchange visitors and temporary workers from high-incidence countries (60.9 cases/100,000 admissions, 95% CI, 58.5 to 63.3), and immigrants and refugees from medium-incidence countries (e.g., 2008 WHO-estimated TB incidence rate of 15–99 cases/100,000 population/year; 55.2 cases/100,000 admissions, 95% CI, 51.6 to 58.8). Conclusions/Significance Newly arrived nonimmigrant visitors contribute substantially to the burden of foreign-born TB in the United States. To achieve the goals of TB elimination, direct investment in global TB control and strategies to target nonimmigrant visitors should be considered.

The history and evolution of immigration medical screening for tuberculosis.

Identifying and managing TB in immigrating populations has been an important aspect of immigration health for over a century, with the primary aim being protecting the host population by preventing the import of communicable diseases carried by the arriving migrants. This review describes the history and development of screening for TB and latent TB infection in the immigration context (describing both screening strategies and diagnostic tests used over the last century), outlining current practices and considering the future impact of new advances in screening. The recent focus of the WHO, regarding their elimination strategy, is further increasing the importance of diagnosing and treating latent TB infection. The last section of this review discusses the latest public health developments in the context of TB screening in immigrant populations.

Optimizing severe acute respiratory syndrome response strategies: lessons learned from quarantine.

Taiwan used quarantine as 1 of numerous interventions implemented to control the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003. From March 18 to July 31, 2003, 147,526 persons were placed under quarantine. Quarantining only persons with known exposure to people infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome could have reduced the number of persons quarantined by approximately 64%. Focusing quarantine efforts on persons with known or suspected exposure can greatly decrease the number of persons placed under quarantine, without substantially compromising its yield and effectiveness.

Cost-Effectiveness of Screening and Treating Foreign-Born Students for Tuberculosis before Entering the United States

Introduction The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is considering implementation of overseas medical screening of student-visa applicants to reduce the numbers of active tuberculosis cases entering the United States. Objective To evaluate the costs, cases averted, and cost-effectiveness of screening for, and treating, tuberculosis in United States-bound students from countries with varying tuberculosis prevalence. Methods Costs and benefits were evaluated from two perspectives, combined and United States only. The combined perspective totaled overseas and United States costs and benefits from a societal perspective. The United States only perspective was a domestic measure of costs and benefits. A decision tree was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis screening and treatment from the combined perspective. Results From the United States only perspective, overseas screening programs of Chinese and Indian students would prevent the importation of 157 tuberculosis cases annually, and result in

Capacity strengthening through pre-migration tuberculosis screening programmes: IRHWG experiences

2.7 million in savings. From the combined perspective, screening programs for Chinese students would cost more than

Immigrant Arrival and Tuberculosis among Large Immigrant- and Refugee-Receiving Countries, 2005–2009

2.8 million annually and screening programs for Indian students nearly

Cross-border solutions needed to address tuberculosis in migrating populations

440,000 annually. From the combined perspective, the incremental cost for each tuberculosis case averted by screening Chinese and Indian students was

Economic analysis of CDC's culture- and smear-based tuberculosis instructions for Filipino immigrants

22,187 and

Influenza-associated deaths among children in the United States, 2003-2004.

15,063, respectively. Implementing screening programs for German students would prevent no cases in most years, and would result in increased costs both overseas and in the United States. The domestic costs would occur because public health departments would need to follow up on students identified overseas as having an elevated risk of tuberculosis. Conclusions Tuberculosis screening and treatment programs for students seeking long term visas to attend United States schools would reduce the number of tuberculosis cases imported. Implementing screening in high-incidence countries could save the United States millions of dollars annually; however there would be increased costs incurred overseas for students and their families.