Agreement between expert thoracic radiologists and the chest radiograph reports provided by consultant radiologists and reporting radiographers in clinical practice: review of a single clinical site

Introduction: To compare the clinical chest radiograph (CXR) reports provided by consultant radiologists and reporting radiographers with expert thoracic radiologists. Methods: Adult CXRs (n=193) from a single site were included; 83% randomly selected from CXRs performed over one year, and 17% selected from the discrepancy meeting. Chest radiographs were independently interpreted by two expert thoracic radiologists (CTR1/2).Clinical history, previous and follow-up imaging was available, but not the original clinical report. Two arbiters compared expert and clinical reports independently. Kappa (Ƙ), Chi Square (χ2) and McNemar tests were performed to determine inter-observer agreement. Results: CTR1 interpreted 187 (97%) and CTR2 186 (96%) CXRs, with 180 CXRs interpreted by both experts. Radiologists and radiographers provided 93 and 87 of the original clinical reports respectively. Consensus between both expert thoracic radiologists and the radiographer clinical report was 70 (CTR1;Ƙ=0.59) and 70 (CTR2; Ƙ=0.62), and comparable to agreement between expert thoracic radiologists and the radiologist clinical report (CTR1=76,Ƙ=0.60; CTR2=75, Ƙ=0.62). Expert thoracic radiologists agreed in 131 cases (Ƙ=0.48). There was no difference in agreement between either expert thoracic radiologist, when the clinical report was provided by radiographers or radiologists (CTR1 χ=0.056, p=0.813; CTR2 χ=0.014, p=0.906), or when stratified by inter-expert agreement; radiographer McNemar p=0.629 and radiologist p=0.701. Conclusion: Even when weighted with chest radiographs reviewed at discrepancy meetings, content of CXR reports from trained radiographers are comparable to the content of reports issued by radiologists and expert thoracic radiologists

The best of respiratory infections from the 2015 European respiratory society international congress

The breadth and quality of scientific presentations on clinical and translational research into respiratory infections at the 2015 European Respiratory Society (ERS) International Congress in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, establishes this area as one of the leadings fields in pulmonology. The host\u2013pathogen relationship in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and the impact of comorbidities and chronic treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with pneumonia were studied. Various communications were dedicated to bronchiectasis and, in particular, to different prognostic and clinical aspects of this disease, including chronic infection with Pseudomonas and inhaled antibiotic therapy. Recent data from the World Health Organization showed that Europe has the highest number of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis cases and the poorest countries have the least access to suitable treatments. Latent tuberculosis and different screening programmes were also discussed with particular attention to risk factors such as HIV infection and diabetes. Several biomarkers were proposed to distinguish between active tuberculosis and latent infection. Major treatment trials were discussed (REMOX, RIFQUIN and STREAM). The possibility of once-weekly treatment in the continuation phase (RIAQUIN) was especially exciting. The continuing rise of Mycobacterium abscessus as a significant pathogen was noted. This article reviews some of the best contributions from the Respiratory Infections Assembly to the 2015 ERS International Congress

The Tuberculosis Network European Trials group (TBnet) ERS Clinical Research Collaboration: addressing drug-resistant tuberculosis through European cooperation

n/

Current use and acceptability of novel diagnostic tests for active tuberculosis: a worldwide survey

Objective: To determine the current use and potential acceptance (by tuberculosis experts worldwide) of novel rapid tests for the diagnosis of tuberculosis that are in line with World Health Organization target product profiles. Methods: A multilingual survey was disseminated online between July and November of 2016. Results: A total of 723 individuals from 114 countries responded to the survey. Smear microscopy was the most commonly used rapid tuberculosis test (available to 90.9% of the respondents), followed by molecular assays (available to 70.7%). Only a small proportion of the respondents in middle-and low-income countries had access to interferon-gamma-release assays. Serological and lateral flow immunoassays were used by more than a quarter (25.4%) of the respondents. Among the respondents who had access to molecular tests, 46.7% were using the Xpert assay overall, that proportion being higher in lower middle-income countries (55.6%) and low-income countries (76.6%). The data also suggest that there was some alignment of pricing for molecular assays. Respondents stated they would accept novel rapid tuberculosis tests if available, including molecular assays (acceptable to 86.0%) or biomarker-based serological assays (acceptable to 81.7%). Simple biomarker-based assays were more commonly deemed acceptable in middle-and lowincome countries. Conclusions: Second-generation molecular assays have become more widely available in high-and low-resource settings. However, the development of novel rapid tuberculosis tests continues to be considered important by tuberculosis experts. Our data also underscore the need for additional training and education of end users

Control of tuberculosis in large cities in developed countries: an organizational problem

Tuberculosis (TB) is still a serious public health issue, even in large cities in developed countries. Control of this old disease is based on complicated programs that require completion of long treatments and contact tracing. In an accompanying research article published in BMC Public Health, Bothamley and colleagues found that areas with a ratio lower than one nurse per forty notifications had increased rates with respect to TB notifications, smear-positive cases, loss to follow-up and treatment abandonment across the UK. Furthermore, in these areas there was less opportunity for directly observed therapy, assistance with complex needs, educational outreach and new-entrant screening. In this commentary, we discuss the importance of improving organizational aspects and evaluating TB control programs. According to Bothamley and colleagues, a ratio of one nurse per forty notifications is an effective method of reducing the high TB incidences observed in London and in other cities in developed countries, or to maintain the decline in incidence in cities with lower incidences. It is crucial to evaluate TB programs every year to detect gaps early

Tuberculosis care among refugees arriving in Europe: a ERS/WHO Europe Region survey of current practices

No evidence exists on tuberculosis (TB) and latent TB infection (LTBI) management policies among refugees in European countries.A questionnaire investigating screening and management practices among refugees was sent to 38 national TB programme representatives of low and intermediate TB incidence European countries/territories of the WHO European Region.Out of 36 responding countries, 31 (86.1%) reported screening for active TB, 19 for LTBI, and eight (22.2%) reporting outcomes of LTBI treatment. Screening for TB is based on algorithms including different combinations of symptom-based questionnaires, bacteriology and chest radiography and LTBI screening on different combinations of tuberculin skin test and interferon-γ release assays. In 22 (61.1%) countries, TB and LTBI screening are performed in refugee centres. In 22 (61.1%) countries, TB services are organised in collaboration with the private sector. 27 (75%) countries answered that screening for TB is performed as per national and international guidelines, while 19 (52.7%) gave the same answer with regards to LTBI screening. Infection control measures are inadequate in several of the countries surveyed.There is need for improved coordination of TB screening in Europe to implement the End TB Strategy and achieve TB elimination

Two interferon gamma release assays for predicting active tuberculosis: the UK PREDICT TB prognostic test study

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Impact on and use of an inner-city London Infectious Diseases Department by international migrants: a questionnaire survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The UK has witnessed a considerable increase in immigration in the past decade. Migrant may face barriers to accessing appropriate health care on arrival and the current focus on screening certain migrants for tuberculosis on arrival is considered inadequate. We assessed the implications for an inner-city London Infectious Diseases Department in a high migrant area.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We administered an anonymous 20-point questionnaire survey to all admitted patients during a 6 week period. Questions related to sociodemographic characteristics and clinical presentation. Analysis was by migration status (UK born <it>vs </it>overseas born).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>111 of 133 patients completed the survey (response rate 83.4%). 58 (52.2%) were born in the UK; 53 (47.7%) of the cohort were overseas born. Overseas-born were over-represented in comparison to Census data for this survey site (47.7% <it>vs </it>33.6%; proportional difference 0.142 [95% CI 0.049–0.235]; p = 0.002): overseas born reported 33 different countries of birth, most (73.6%) of whom arrived in the UK pre-1975 and self-reported their nationality as British. A smaller number (26.4%) were new migrants to the UK (≤10 years), mostly refugees/asylum seekers. Overseas-born patients presented with a broad range and more severe spectrum of infections, differing from the UK-born population, resulting in two deaths in this group only. Presentation with a primary infection was associated with refugee/asylum status (n = 8; OR 6.35 [95% CI 1.28–31.50]; p = 0.023), being a new migrant (12; 10.62 [2.24–50.23]; p = 0.003), and being overseas born (31; 3.69 [1.67–8.18]; p = 0.001). Not having registered with a primary-care physician was associated with being overseas born, being a refugee/asylum seeker, being a new migrant, not having English as a first language, and being in the UK for ≤5 years. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of duration of illness prior to presentation or duration of hospitalisation (mean 11.74 days [SD 12.69]).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Migrants presented with a range of more severe infections, which suggests they face barriers to accessing appropriate health care and screening both on arrival and once settled through primary care services. A more organised and holistic approach to migrant health care is required.</p