Randomized trial compared active contact investigation with passive methods for TB screening, showing differing case yields and impacts on vulnerable populations.
Background: Household contacts (HHCs) of pulmonary TB patients in Northeast Nigeria face high infection risk. We compared active versus passive contact investigation strategies in this high-burden setting. Methods: A randomized study (July-Dec 2022) assigned 165 index patients per arm across 4 facilities in Adamawa/Yobe States. Active arm: Health workers conducted home visits for symptom screening. Passive arm: HHCs self-presented to clinics. Presumptive TB cases underwent GeneXpert testing; Bac+ cases received treatment, others referred. Results: Among 982 active-arm HHCs, 93% (913) were screened, compared to 99% (842/851) of passive-arm HHCs. Presumptive TB was higher in the passive arm (281 vs. 221). Case yields showed Bac+ TB was similar (Active: 29, Passive: 32), while all TB forms were slightly higher in the active arm (40 vs. 36), including more children <5 (9 vs. 4). Active screening yielded more DR-TB (5 vs. 2) and linked more HIV+ contacts to care (12 vs. 5). Conclusion: Passive strategy achieved higher screening coverage, but active strategy detected more clinically diagnosed children<5 (9 vs 4), DR-TB (5 vs 2), and HIV co-infections (12 vs 5). Active home visits are critical for finding vulnerable cases in Northeast Nigeria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdulkarim et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: