Analysis reveals screening coverage rates of 96.4% in children using immunoassay tests, suggesting methodological improvements are needed for accurate data.
Introduction . The paediatric tuberculosis screening coverage rate can vary significantly depending on its calculation and planning methodology, which will ultimately affect the formation of rates in the reporting period. Aim . To review the results of annual immunological screening and the methodology for calculating the preventive tuberculosis screening coverage rates for the metropolitan population aged 1–17 years. Materials and methods . The data from 2023 healthcare facility reports on preventive screening of children aged 1–17 years in Moscow using a skin test with purified tuberculosis allergen-standard solution and a skin test using recombinant tuberculosis allergen-standard solution were used. Results . In accordance with the 2023 population screening program for early detection of tuberculosis in Moscow, the number of children screened for tuberculosis using immunoassay tests amounted to 1,900,739 (96.4% coverage of the assigned population). According to the data of Federal Statistical Monitoring (FSN) Form No. 30, 1,921,590 children (including 718,272 children aged 1–7 years) were screened for early detection of tuberculosis in Moscow healthcare facilities in 2023 (97.5% coverage rate against the program target), and 1,916,255 children were screened in healthcare facilities with assigned population (97.2% coverage rate against the program target). The preventive pediatric tuberculosis screening made it possible to identify 45 new cases of tuberculosis among children and adolescents, 86 new cases of residual post-tuberculosis changes, and also to form a high-risk group among children with altered tuberculosis allergen sensitivity (3,772). Conclusions . The paediatric tuberculosis screening coverage rate depends on its calculation methodology; it should be planned and calculated based on the number of the assigned population to be served by healthcare facilities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sevostyanova et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: