Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link

Disclaimer: Early release articles are not considered as final versions. Any changes will be reflected in the online version in the month the article is officially released.

Volume 31, Number 7—July 2025

Synopsis

Systematic Review of Contact Investigation Costs for Tuberculosis, United States

Garrett R. Beeler AsayComments to Author , Kai H. Young, Tempest Hill, and Gibril J. Njie
Author affiliation: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Main Article

Table 1

Studies included in systematic review of contact investigation costs for tuberculosis, United States

Characteristic No. (%) studies, N = 10 References
Publication period
1990s 2 (20) (16,28)
2000s 2 (20) (7,30)
2010s 5 (50) (17,25–27,29)
2020s
 1 (10)
 (31)
Study location
Northeast 1 (10) (27)
Midwest 0 (0)
South 4 (40) (17,26,29,30)
West 3 (30) (7,25,31)
Multistate 1 (10) (16)
Other*
 1 (10)
 (28)
Setting
Community 6 (60) (7,16,17,29–31)
Healthcare 3 (30) (26–28)
School 1 (10) (25)

*Unknown location.

Main Article

References
  1. World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 19]. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240083851
  2. World Health Organization. Towards tuberculosis elimination: an action framework in low-incidence countries. 2014 [cited 2024 Nov 19]. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241507707
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Reported tuberculosis in the United States, 2023. November 2024 [cited 2025 Jun 5]. https://www.cdc.gov/tb-surveillance-report-2023/summary/national.html
  4. Williams  PM, Pratt  RH, Walker  WL, Price  SF, Stewart  RJ, Feng  PI. Tuberculosis - United States, 2023. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2024;73:265–70. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. National Tuberculosis Controllers Association; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guidelines for the investigation of contacts of persons with infectious tuberculosis. Recommendations from the National Tuberculosis Controllers Association and CDC. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2005;54(RR-15):1–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Mazurek  GH, Jereb  J, Lobue  P, Iademarco  MF, Metchock  B, Vernon  A. Guidelines for using the QuantiFERON-TB Gold Test for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, United States. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2005;54:49–55.
  7. Sprinson  JE, Flood  J, Fan  CS, Shaw  TA, Pascopella  L, Young  JA, et al. Evaluation of tuberculosis contact investigations in California. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2003;7(Suppl 3):S363–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Shrestha  S, Cilloni  L, Asay  GRB, Kammerer  JS, Raz  K, Shaw  T, et al. Model-based analysis of impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis outbreak investigations, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2025;31:497–506. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Carande-Kulis  VG, Maciosek  MV, Briss  PA, Teutsch  SM, Zaza  S, Truman  BI, et al.; Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2000;18(Suppl):75–91. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. The Community Guide. Methods manual, part 2: economic review process [cited 2019 Jun 7]. https://www.thecommunityguide.org/pages/economic-review-methods.html
  11. Levin  HM, Belfield  C. Guiding the development and use of cost-effectiveness analysis in education. J Res Educ Eff. 2015;8:400–18. DOIGoogle Scholar
  12. Chattopadhyay  SK, Jacob  V, Hopkins  DP, Lansky  A, Elder  R, Cuellar  AE, et al.; Community Preventive Services Task Force. Community guide methods for systematic reviews of economic evidence. Am J Prev Med. 2023;64:569–78. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. May 2019 metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area occupational employment and wage estimates. 2019 [cited 2020 Sep 25]. https://www.bls.gov/oes/2019/may/oessrcma.htm
  14. US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer costs for employee compensation—December 2024. March 14, 2025 release [cited 2025 Jun 4]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf
  15. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Physician fee schedule, 2022 [cited 2025 Jun 4]. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/physician-fee-schedule/search
  16. Brown  RE, Miller  B, Taylor  WR, Palmer  C, Bosco  L, Nicola  RM, et al. Health-care expenditures for tuberculosis in the United States. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:1595–600. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Miller  TL, McNabb  SJ, Hilsenrath  P, Pasipanodya  J, Drewyer  G, Weis  SE. The societal cost of tuberculosis: Tarrant County, Texas, 2002. Ann Epidemiol. 2010;20:1–7. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Personal consumption expenditures price index [cited 2023 Dec 21]. https://www.bea.gov/data/personal-consumption-expenditures-price-index
  19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2022 ARPE contact investigations report [cited 2025 Jun 4]. https://www.cdc.gov/tb-data/arpe-reports/2022-contact-investigations.html
  20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2020 contact investigations report (ARPE data) [cited 2025 Jun 4]. https://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=https://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/evaluation/arpe-data.htm
  21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017 Contact Investigation Report (ARPE Data). Atlanta, (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2020.
  22. Beeler Asay  GR, Bohm  MK. Tuberculosis diagnostic test use in the United States privately insured population, 2013–2022. Poster presented at: Joint Conference of The Union–North American Region and the National TB Coalition of America; Baltimore, MD, USA; 2024 Apr 16–19.
  23. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory fee schedule. 2022 [cited 2024 Nov 19]. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/fee-schedules/clinical-laboratory-fee-schedule-clfs
  24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a high school and school-based supervision of an isoniazid-rifapentine regimen for preventing tuberculosis—Colorado, 2011–2012. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2013;62:805–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Cruz  AT, Medina  D, Whaley  EM, Ware  KM, Koy  TH, Starke  JR. Tuberculosis among families of children with suspected tuberculosis and employees at a children’s hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32:188–90. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kelly  AM, D’Agostino  JF, Andrada  LV, Liu  J, Larson  E. Delayed tuberculosis diagnosis and costs of contact investigations for hospital exposure: New York City, 2010-2014. Am J Infect Control. 2017;45:483–6. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kerr  CM, Savage  GT. Managing exposure to tuberculosis in the PACU: CDC guidelines and cost analysis. J Perianesth Nurs. 1996;11:143–6. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Park  PH, Holland  DP, Wade  A, Goswami  ND, Bissette  D, Stout  JE. Public health costs for tuberculosis suspects in Wake County, North Carolina, United States. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2013;17:759–63. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pisu  M, Gerald  J, Shamiyeh  JE, Bailey  WC, Gerald  LB. Targeted tuberculosis contact investigation saves money without sacrificing health. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2009;15:319–27. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Shiau  R, Holmen  J, Chitnis  AS. Public health expenditures and clinical and social complexity of tuberculosis cases—Alameda County, California, July–December 2017. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2022;28:188–98. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Rainisch  G, Jeon  S, Pappas  D, Spencer  KD, Fischer  LS, Adhikari  BB, et al. Estimated COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted by case investigation and contact tracing in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5:e224042. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Beeler Asay  GR, Woodruff  R, Sanderson  DM, Fisher  CF, Marks  SM, Green  VD, et al. Cost-effectiveness of expanded latent TB infection testing and treatment: Lynn City, Massachusetts, USA. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2024;28:21–8. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Jo  Y, Shrestha  S, Gomes  I, Marks  S, Hill  A, Asay  G, et al. Model-based cost-effectiveness of state-level latent tuberculosis interventions in California, Florida, New York, and Texas. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;73:e3476–82. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Li  Y, Marks  SM, Beeler Asay  GR, Winston  CA, Pepin  D, McClure  S, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of expanded targeted testing and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection among the Medicare population in 2022. Ann Intern Med. 2025;178:479–89. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Main Article

Page created: May 14, 2025
Page updated: June 10, 2025
Page reviewed: June 10, 2025
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external