Figures
Abstract
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of becoming infected with tuberculosis (TB), and potentially of being infectious themselves when they are ill. To assess the magnitude of healthcare-associated TB (HCA-TB) transmission from HCWs to patients and colleagues, we searched three electronic databases up to February 2014 to select primary studies on HCA-TB incidents in which a HCW was the index case and possibly exposed patients and co-workers were screened.We identified 34 studies out of 2,714 citations. In 29 individual investigations, active TB was diagnosed in 3/6,080 (0.05%) infants, 18/3,167 (0.57%) children, 1/3,600 (0.03%) adult patients and 0/2,407 HCWs. The quantitative analysis of 28 individual reports showed that combined proportions of active TB among exposed individuals were: 0.11% (95% CI 0.04–0.21) for infants, 0.38% (95% CI 0.01–1.60) for children, 0.09% (95% CI 0.02–0.22) for adults and 0.00% (95% CI 0.00–0.38) for HCWs. Combined proportions of individuals who acquired TB infection were: 0.57% (95% CI 7.28E-03 – 2.02) for infants, 0.9% (95% CI 0.40–1.60) for children, 4.32% (95% CI 1.43–8.67) for adults and 2.62% (95% CI 1.05–4.88) for HCWs. The risk of TB transmission from HCWs appears to be lower than that recorded in other settings or in the healthcare setting when the index case is not a HCW. To provide a firm evidence base for the screening strategies, more and better information is needed on the infectivity of the source cases, the actual exposure level of screened contacts, and the environmental characteristics of the healthcare setting.
Citation: Schepisi MS, Sotgiu G, Contini S, Puro V, Ippolito G, Girardi E (2015) Tuberculosis Transmission from Healthcare Workers to Patients and Co-workers: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE 10(4): e0121639. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121639
Academic Editor: Giovanni Delogu, The Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, ITALY
Received: November 28, 2014; Accepted: February 11, 2015; Published: April 2, 2015
Copyright: © 2015 Schepisi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This work was supported by the Italian Ministry of Health – “Ricerca Finalizzata” Grant no. RF-2009-1499157 and “Ricerca Corrente” INMI Spallanzani. The funder had no role in planning or conducting the review or in the decision to publish its results. Monica Sañé Schepisi is a post-graduate student and the recipient of a scholarship from the Specialisation School of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
The transmission of tuberculosis (TB) in healthcare facilities is an important clinical and public health concern. [1, 2].
Since the late 1980s, in the context of rising TB incidence rates in some low- and high-income countries, coupled with the increasing incidence of TB and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection, and with the emergence of multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), several major nosocomial TB outbreaks were reported and scientific interest on healthcare-associated transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis was re-stimulated [3–7]. These outbreaks were attributed to delayed diagnosis of infectious TB patients, unrecognized drug resistance and inadequate infection control measures. On this basis, the major national and international agencies [1, 2, 8] issued recommendations for TB infection control within healthcare facilities, focusing their attention on potential infectious patients as a source of transmission and on protecting other patients and healthcare workers (HCWs).
More recently, episodes of potential transmission of M. tuberculosis from HCWs to patients have highlighted another risk related to the healthcare-associated transmission of TB (HCA-TB), raising considerable anxiety for the vulnerable groups involved and attracting media attention due to the risk of M. tuberculosis transmission to numerous contacts. On the other hand, the actual risk of M. tuberculosis transmission associated to a HCW with TB to the patients he/she serves is still ill-defined [9, 10].
To assess and quantify the magnitude of the risk of transmission of M. tuberculosis from HCWs with pulmonary TB to patients and co-workers, in order to provide scientific evidence for policy development, we systematically reviewed HCA-TB incidents published to date.
Methods
We systematically reviewed the medical literature to evaluate the current evidence on the risk of HCA-TB transmission from HCWs. We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement as a reference document for reporting our findings [11]. The review protocol is available on request from the authors.
Literature Search
We searched three electronic databases (i.e. PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE) up to February 2014. Key words used for the electronic search included the following words/lines: “tuberculosis”, “healthcare workers” and “transmission of infectious disease from professional to patient”. Search strategies were adapted for each database. The complete strategy is reported in S1 File.
Reviews or editorials on the topic as well as the lists of the references of the selected articles were analysed to retrieve manuscripts not included in the final output of the bibliographic search. The Outbreak Database (http://www.outbreak-database.com/Home.aspx, last accessed in February 2014), an international database containing standardised data extracted from a large number of outbreak reports published in the medical literature, was checked for additional studies.
A search for the grey literature and media reports, based on the search string: (tuberculosis AND ("healthcare worker" OR "healthcare workers" OR nosocomial OR outbreak)) NOT (bovine OR "non-tuberculous") was attempted using the global electronic outbreak reporting system ProMED-mail (http://www.promedmail.org/), last accessed in February 2014.
Selection Criteria
In this systematic review, we considered observational studies reporting the results of a contact investigation in a healthcare-associated setting on patients and co-workers exposed to HCWs affected by respiratory active TB.
Reviews, conference contributions, editorials, letters, modelling articles, guidelines/recommendations were excluded.
Selection of the articles was performed by two reviewers (MSS, EG) working independently and following a three-stage procedure: first- titles alone, then abstracts of the selected titles and finally a full-text review of the selected abstracts. Abstracts were discarded only if considered ineligible by both reviewers, otherwise they were retained for the full-text review. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.
Studies written in any language were considered, but data were extracted only from those published in a language mastered by one of the authors (English, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese or French). When multiple publications from the same population were selected, only those including the most complete report were included. Data extraction procedures are reported in S2 File.
Quality of studies was assessed through the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS) for Cohort Studies [12]. The scale consists of nine items that cover three dimensions: (1) patient selection (4 items); (2) comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis (2 items); and (3) assessment of outcome (3 items). A point is awarded for each item that is satisfied by the study. The total score therefore ranges from zero to nine, with higher scores indicating higher quality. For each study, two checklists were completed, one for each outcome considered (LTBI and active TB).
Statistical Analysis
The meta-analysis included only those studies reporting results of contact investigation separately for infants (up to 24 months), children (up to 16 years) and adult patients or for health care workers in a single TB incident occurring in a health care facility.
Combined estimates of the proportion of active TB cases and cases who had acquired TB infection resulting from exposure to the HCW, together with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were computed collecting all the available data displayed in the selected studies.
A random-effects meta-analysis was performed in order to account for the expected between-study variability for each study, along with a pooled estimate using the softwares for statistical analysis Stata 9.0 (StataCorp. 2005. Stata Statistical Software: Release 9. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP) and StatsDirect 2.8.0.
Results
Our literature database search yielded 2,714 records and after considering their references and citing articles, we finally included 34 original articles resulting from the selection process described in Fig 1. A complete list of excluded articles with reasons for exclusion is available upon request from the authors.
Flowchart depicting methods for article inclusion and exclusion. Abbreviations: MTB = Mycobacterium tuberculosis; TB = Tuberculosis; LTBI = Latent Tuberculosis Infection; HCWs = Health Care Workers
The 34 articles included in this review reported information on a total of 117 HCA-TB incidents. Twenty-nine articles-thereafter referred to as individual studies- described procedures and findings of contact screening in a single TB incident occurring in a health care facility [13–41]. The remaining five articles—cumulative studies—reported the overall results of retrospective surveys of TB incidents in different settings or cities, identified from national surveillance data [42–46]. Extraction tables are available in S1 Table.
Articles included in the present review were published from 1974 [13, 14] to 2013 [41] and reported data on incidents that occurred in the USA (66, 56.4%) [13–15, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 32, 33, 35, 38, 39], France (34, 29.0%) [26, 28, 29, 34, 36, 37, 43, 44, 46], UK (5, 4.2%) [16, 18, 31, 42, 45], Netherlands (6, 5.1%) [22], Canada (2, 1.7%) [21, 24] Ireland (1, 0.9%) [39], Japan (1, 0.9%) [27], Australia (1, 0.9%) [41] and Italy (1, 0.9%) [29].
Study Quality
Overall, the quality, evaluated by the NOS checklist for the two outcomes “LTBI” and “active TB”, was low (median score four, over a maximum score of nine). The most frequent reasons for low quality scoring were the absence of a non-exposed cohort, the lack of demonstration that the outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study, an absent or too short follow-up for the assessment of the outcome “active TB” and the incomplete follow-up of the cohort when considering exposed adult patients or HCWs. Results of quality assessment of the 34 included studies are reported in S2 Table.
Description of Included Studies
Nineteen incidents (16.2%) occurred in nurseries/maternity wards [13–15, 17, 22–25, 27–30, 43, 44, 46, 41], 11 in emergency/intensive care/reanimation units [32, 37, 42, 44, 46] (9.4%) and 10 in paediatric units [16, 19, 20, 21, 26, 42–44] (8.5%). Nine incidents (7.7%) occurred in outpatient settings and five involved more than one setting [19, 34, 38, 43, 44].
Characteristics of the 117 index cases are summarised in Table 1.
Exposed Patients
In 37 out of the 117 incidents, exposed patients were at a high risk of developing active TB once infected with M. tuberculosis because of young age [13–30, 41–44], oncological-hematological diseases [38], renal diseases [31, 35], haemodialysis [33], HIV infection [34] or other co-morbidities [16, 40].
Methods and Results of Contact Investigations
In the majority of studies, all individuals who were in the healthcare setting during the period of infectivity of the index case were considered as candidates for screening and no criteria for prioritisation were reported. In seven incidents, priority for screening was defined based on the risk of progression to active TB of exposed individuals [40, 43], while the classic concentric circle approach for contact screening was followed in two incidents [25, 38]. In two incidents [25, 34], the exposed patients were not screened for LTBI, as only surveillance of active TB was performed.
Among individuals identified as candidates for screening, the proportion of those who were actually screened ranged in different studies from 12.8 to 100.0% (median 78.0%) for patients and from 67.3 to 100.0% (median 97.3%) for HCWs.
Tuberculin skin tests were used to detect LTBI, as a single test or combined with other assays (i.e. IGRA not otherwise specified [44], QFT [27], T-SPOT.TB [26]. In two studies, QFT-IT was used as the only test [29] or as the main method in combination with TST [40]. Repeated TST administration to identify the booster phenomenon was used in one study only [33]. (S3 Table)
In 29 individual investigations (S1 Table: Tables A-B), active TB was diagnosed in 3/6,080 (0.05%) infants, 18/3,167 (0.57%) children, 1/3,600 (0.03%) adult patients and 0/2,407 (0.00%) HCWs. Five cumulative studies (S1 Table: Tables C-D) identified active TB in 0/201 (0.00%) infants, 2/2,030 children (0.10%), 1/3,043 adult patients (0.03%) and 3/4,612 HCWs (0.07%). In four reports it was not possible to classify exposed individuals into age groups. Three reports provided data on a total of 2,325 infants and children [20, 21, 44] with no secondary cases, while in an article [18] 15 TB cases were detected among 1,095 exposed children and adults (0.014%).
In one study, the epidemiologic link between the index case and a secondary TB case in an exposed infant was confirmed by IS6110 restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) [29].
Characteristics of the secondary cases are summarised in Table 2.
Long-term follow-up, ranging from 18 months to 4 years, performed by review of TB registers or visiting individuals at risk in eight incidents, did not identify additional active TB cases linked to the index cases [21, 25, 29, 31, 32, 34, 40].
In individual studies, infected cases were 128/5,897 (2.17%) among infants and 236/3,149 (7.49%) among children. Of the 128 infected infants, 118 were from a single study in which only QFT-IT was used to test 1,340 newborns [29]. If the results of this study are excluded, the number of infected infants decreases to 10/4,457 (0.22%). 31/554 (5.6%) adult patients and 30/1,372 (2.18%) HCWs converted to a positive test. (S1 Table: Tables A-B)
In studies for which it was not possible to classify exposed individuals into age groups, 25 infected cases (1.23%) were reported among 2,404 infants and children [21, 22, 44] and 212/1,080 (19.63%) infected individuals were detected among exposed children and adults [18].
In cumulative studies on exposed infants or children (S1 Table: Table C), infected cases were 2/201 (0.01%) and 10/1,613 (0.62%), respectively. Among 2,343 adult patients and 3,515 HCWs (S1 Table: Table D), there were no data on cases converted following exposure to the index cases.
Meta-analysis
The quantitative analysis included 28 [13–17, 19–41] individual studies for which the proportion of active cases or of infected individuals could be computed separately for infants (up to 24 months), children, adult patients, and/or HCWs.
Combined proportions of active TB cases among exposed individuals were: 0.11% (95% CI 0.04–0.21) for infants (Fig 2A), 0.38% (95% CI 0.01–1.60) for children (Fig 2B), 0.09% (95% CI 0.02–0.22) for adults (Fig 2C) and 0.00% (95% CI C.I 0.00–0.38) for HCWs (Fig 2D).
Forest plots for: A. Proportion of active TB cases among infants; B. Proportion of active TB cases among children; C. Proportion of active TB cases among adult patients; D. Proportion of active TB cases among HCWs. (A B C D elements are ordered from top to bottom and left to right).
Combined proportions of individuals who acquired TB infection were: 0.57 (95% CI 0.00–2.02) for infants (Fig 3A), 0.90% (95% CI 0.40–1.60) for children (Fig 3B), 4.32% (95% CI 1.43–8.67) for adults (Fig 3C) and 2.62% (95% CI 1.05–4.88) for HCWs (Fig 3D). The combined proportion of infants with TB infection was 0.28% (95% CI 0.07–0.65) if the only study (29) in which IGRAs were used to detect LTBI is excluded.
Forest plots for: A. Proportion of cases who acquired TB infection cases among infants; B. Proportion of acquired TB infection among children; C. Proportion of acquired TB infection among adult patients; D. Proportion of acquired TB infection among HCWs. (A B C D elements are ordered from top to bottom and left to right).
Discussion
This systematic literature review and meta-analysis has evaluated the magnitude of the risk of transmission of TB from a HCW with pulmonary disease to his/her patients or co-workers in healthcare settings. The evidence identified shows that TB is rarely diagnosed among those exposed to HCWs in a healthcare setting, and that TB infection attributable to this exposure is observed in a limited proportion of exposed individuals. The risk of M. tuberculosis transmission appears to be clearly lower compared to that recorded in other settings such as schools [47], congregate/community settings [48–54], in the household [55] or even in the healthcare setting when the index case is not a HCW [56–61].
The occurrence of active TB among young children exposed to a potentially infectious person is an important indicator of the risk of transmission of LTBI. In fact, it has been estimated that 50% of the infants aged less than one year and 20–25% of those aged one-two years develop active TB mostly within one year of acquiring the infection [62].
In only two of the 15 incidents included in this meta-analysis in which infants were exposed, secondary active cases were recorded, and the pooled risk of active TB was estimated to be 0.11%. Consistently, we found a very low proportion of exposed infants with TB infection: 0.29% in 13 studies in which the tuberculin skin test was used to screen for TB infection. In a single study [29] involving 1,340 newborns, 8.8% were considered to have acquired TB infection, on the basis of the results of an IGRA test, although only one case of TB was diagnosed among exposed infants at the first screening and no additional cases were recorded after a median follow-up of 18 months (P. Borgia, personal communication). The possibility that false positive IGRA results may have contributed to the high rate of positivity in this study cannot be ruled out. Pooled risks of infection and active disease observed in children aged two to 16 years were also low (0.38% for LTBI and 0.90% for active TB).
The risk of TB transmission to infants and children estimated in this review was clearly lower than that reported in other settings. A recent meta-analysis [55] on the yield of screening of contacts of patients with TB, found a proportion of active TB of 4.7% among children up to five years and 2.9% among children aged six to 14 in high-income countries, and a prevalence of TB infection of 16.3% and 18.4% in the same two age groups. A literature review [47] on school outbreaks involving children aged three to 11 as close contacts reported weighted average TB transmission rates of 39.3% and 69.8% if the index case was an adult or a child, respectively. Very high transmission rates were also recorded in children day-care settings [51–54].
Higher infection transmission rates in HCA settings have also been reported by a systematic review [63] on exposed infants when the index was the mother (1.49%), while lower rates were found when the index case was an infant (0.00%).
Very few active TB cases were diagnosed among exposed adults (two) and co-workers (three). TB infection transmission rates to these individuals, estimated by the conversion to a positive test, (4.32% and 2.62%) were higher than those recorded for children and infants, but lower than those observed in different setting or from a different source. Transmission rates above 20% have been estimated among adults in other congregate settings based on LTBI prevalence [21]. Very high rates of secondary active TB and LTBI transmission have also been reported in nosocomial incidents in which the index case was an HIV infected adult patient [4] or an adult with MDR TB [24]. Information on compliance with recommendations on TB surveillance in HCWs was not provided in many studies. The limited information retrieved however, suggests that this compliance may be suboptimal.
This review has some possible limitations. Despite the comprehensive search, we may have missed relevant studies. Investigation on HCA-TB incidents is a routine public health activity, and therefore does not necessarily result in a scientific publication. In fact, in outbreak databases and global electronic outbreak reporting systems we found some information on incidents for which we could not identify any formal publication. A large proportion of the reviewed incidents involved infants, children, or immunocompromised adults. This may reflect a high propensity to publish incidents involving individuals at increased risk of developing active disease following exposure to TB rather than an increased incidence of TB among HCWs working in these setting, which appears unlikely.
The reliability of figures describing the rates of infection may be somehow limited. In fact there was some heterogeneity in the definitions of TST positivity. Moreover, all included studies considered TST or IGRA positivity in children at the first screening as evidence of LTBI acquired following exposure to the index case. In low incidence countries, this assumption appears plausible in those aged less than two years, while for older children, previous household and community exposures cannot usually be ruled out. For exposed adults, conversion to a positive test was ascribed to exposure to HCW index cases. However, when exposed HCWs were compared to other unexposed personnel in the same or a different hospital [14, 39] or to employees in the same setting during previous years [14] no significant differences in terms of rate of conversion were found.A precautionary approach is usually taken in investigating HCA-TB incidents, resulting in large screenings of potentially exposed patients, which may involve hundreds of persons and require substantial public health resources. On the basis of the low risk of transmission from HCWs evidenced in this review, this approach does not appear to be justified. Effectiveness of alternative strategies, such as initial restriction of screening to those most intensively exposed, extended to those at a lower risk (if transmission is found in the highest-risk group [41]) should be evaluated.
However, to provide a firm evidence base for the screening strategies, more and better information is needed. Results of HCA-TB incident investigations should be made widely available to the scientific and public health community, either through scientific publications or through recording in public health databases [64] and a standardised format for reporting on these incidents should be promoted.
Finally, strategies to promote timely diagnosis of active TB among HCWs may be needed. In this context, the effectiveness of TB symptom reminders to health care staff [65], should be considered.
Supporting Information
S2 Table. New Castle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121639.s004
(DOC)
S3 Table. Tests used to diagnose Latent Tuberculosis Infection and their cut-offs for positivity among patients and co-workers contacts of Health Care Workers with pulmonary tuberculosis.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121639.s005
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
We thank all authors who provided additional information or clarification: Dr Ashantha Naidoo, Dr Cyril Naidoo, Dr Karen Lockhart, Dr Annalee Yassi and Dr Sally Millership.
We gratefully acknowledge Renata Mancini, librarian at the L. Spallanzani National Institute for Infectious Diseases and Rosanna Cammarano, librarian at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Rome, Italy) for their generous assistance and valuable contributions in developing the search strategy and document retrieval.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: GS. Performed the experiments: MSS EG SC. Analyzed the data: GS. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: GS. Wrote the paper: MSS EG. Contributed to the interpretation of results and to the discussion and revision of the manuscript: VP GI.
References
- 1.
World Health Organisation. Policy on TB Control in Health Care Facilities, Congregate Settings and Households. 2009. WHO/HTM/TB/2009.419 http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241598323_eng.pdf. Accessed 2013 Oct 15.
- 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guidelines for Preventing the Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Health-Care Settings, 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005;54:1–141. pmid:15647722
- 3. Villarino ME, Lawrence M, Salinas L, Amil S, Rullan JV et al. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a hospital unit for HIV-infected patients. JAMA. 1992;267:2632–4. pmid:1573751
- 4. Jonsson J, Kan B, Berggren I, Bruchfeld J. Jonsson J, Kan B, et al. Extensive nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a low-incidence country. J Hosp Infect. 2013;83:321–6. pmid:23433580
- 5. Beck-Sagué C, Dooley SW, Hutton MD, Otten J, Breeden A, Crawford JT et al. Hospital Outbreak of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis infections: factors in transmission to staff and HIV-infected patients. JAMA. 1992;268:1280–6. pmid:1507374
- 6. Pearson ML, Jereb JA, Frieden TR, Crawford JT, Davis BJ, Dooley SW et al. Nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. A risk to patients and health care workers. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117:191–6. pmid:1352093
- 7. Gandhi NR, Weissman D, Moodley P, Ramathal M, Elson I, Kreiswirth BN et al. Nosocomial transmission of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis in a rural hospital in South Africa. J Infect Dis. 2013;207:9–17. pmid:23166374
- 8.
NICE clinical guideline 117 Tuberculosis: clinical diagnosis and management of tuberculosis, and measures for its prevention and control. Issued: March 2011. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG117. Accessed 2013 Oct 15.
- 9. Anon. Nurse with TB triggers mass patient testing. Nurs Times. 2001;97:7.
- 10. Sterling TR, Haas DW. Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from Health Care Workers. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:118–121. pmid:16837674
- 11. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097. pmid:19621072
- 12.
Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed 2013 Oct 15.
- 13. Keim LW. Letter: Management of newborns after nursery exposure to tuberculosis. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1974;110:522–523. pmid:4414283
- 14. Light IJ, Saidleman M, Sutherland JM. Management of newborns after nursery exposure to tuberculosis. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1974;109:415–9. pmid:4544642
- 15. Steiner P, Rao M, Victoria MS, Rudolph N, Buynoski G. Miliary tuberculosis in two infants after nursery exposure: epidemiologic, clinical, and laboratory findings. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1976;113:267–271. pmid:1259235
- 16. Stewart CJ. Tuberculosis infection in a paediatric department. Br Med J. 1976;1:30–32. pmid:1247721
- 17. Burk JR, Bahar D, Wolf FS, Greene J, Bailey WC. Nursery exposure of 528 newborns to a nurse with pulmonary tuberculosis. South Med J. 1978;71:7–10. pmid:414362
- 18. Smith WH, Davies D, Mason KD, Onions JP. Intraoral and pulmonary tuberculosis following dental treatment. Lancet. 1982;1:842–4. pmid:6122068
- 19. Askew GL, Finelli L, Hutton M, Laraque F, Porterfield D, Shilkret K et al. Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission from a pediatrician to patients. Pediatrics. 1997;100:19–23. pmid:9200355
- 20. Moore M, Schulte J, Valway S, Stader B, Kistler V, Margraf P et al. Evaluation of transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a pediatric setting. J Pediatr. 1998;133:108–112. pmid:9672521
- 21. Brassard P, Lamarre V. Evaluation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission from a pediatrician and initial compliance to prophylaxis of contacts in an outpatient pediatric clinic. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2000;19:968–972. pmid:11055598
- 22. van der Zanden AG, Bosje T, Heilmann FG, van Soolingen D. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis to a nurse demonstrated by means of spoligotyping of a formalin-fixed bronchial biopsy. Neth J Med. 2001;59:152–7. pmid:11583831
- 23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission in a newborn nursery and maternity ward—New York City, 2003. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005;54:1280 1283. pmid:16371943
- 24. Sen M, Gregson D, Lewis J. Neonatal exposure to active pulmonary tuberculosis in a health care professional. CMAJ. 2005;172:1453–1456. pmid:15911860
- 25. Nania JJ, Skinner J, Wilkerson K, Warkentin JV, Thayer V, Swift M et al. Exposure to pulmonary tuberculosis in a neonatal intensive care unit: unique aspects of contact investigation and management of hospitalized neonates. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007;6:661–665. pmid:17520537
- 26. Berlioz M, Del Mar Corcostegui M, Dalfin M, Saos J, Albertini M. Experience of extensive screening of Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission to patients exposed to a pediatrician. Arch Pediatr. 2008;11:1637–1642. pmid:18848437
- 27. Ohno H, Ikegami Y, Kishida K, Yamamoto Y, Ikeda N, Taniguchi T et al. Hospital Infection Control Committee. A contact investigation of the transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from a nurse working in a newborn nursery and maternity ward. J Infect Chemother. 2008;1:66–71.
- 28. Dubrulle S, Vervel C, Boutignon H, Romeo B. Exposure of a cohort of newborn infants to tuberculosis in a neonatology service. Arch Pediatr. 2010;10:1491–1494. pmid:20851580
- 29.
Borgia P, Cambieri A, Chini F, Coltella L, Delogu G, Di Rosa E et al. Suspected transmission of tuberculosis in a maternity ward from a smear-positive nurse: preliminary results of clinical evaluations and testing of neonates potentially exposed, Rome, Italy, 1 January to 28 July 2011. Euro Surveill. 2011;16:pii = 19984.
- 30. Perry A, Angoulvant F, Chadelat K, De Lauzanne A, Houdouin V, Kheniche A et al. Contage tuberculeux néonatal en maternité: dépistage et évolution d’une cohorte de nourrissons exposés. Arch Pediatr. 2012;19:396–403. pmid:22377245
- 31. Drobniewski FA, Ferguson J, Barritt K, Higgins RM, Higgon M, Neave D et al. Follow up of an immunocompromised contact group of a case of open pulmonary tuberculosis on a renal unit. Thorax. 1995;50:863–868. pmid:7570438
- 32. Bock NN, Sotir MJ, Parrott PL, Blumberg HM. Nosocomial tuberculosis exposure in an outpatient setting: evaluation of patients exposed to healthcare providers with tuberculosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;6:421–425. pmid:10395145
- 33. Linquist JA, Rosaia CM, Riemer B, Heckman K, Alvarez F. Tuberculosis exposure of patients and staff in an outpatient hemodialysis unit. Am J Infect Control. 2002;5:307 310. pmid:12163866
- 34. Hillarus M, Lucet JC, Ruimy R, Longuet P, Bouvet E, Vilde JL. Évaluation de la transmission nosocomiale de la tuberculose d’un soignant aux patients exposés. BEH. 2003;10–11:54–57.
- 35. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tuberculosis transmission in a renal dialysis center—Nevada, 2003. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53:873 875. pmid:15385919
- 36. Trueba F, Haus-Cheymol R, Koeck JL, Nombalier Y, Ceyriac A, Boiron S et al. Contact tracing in a case of tuberculosis in a health care worker. Rev Mal Respir. 2006;4(Pt 1):339 342.
- 37. Magnin D, Ronnaux-Baron AS, Denis MA, Carret G, Nicolle MC, Vanhems P. Investigation d’un cas de tuberculose pulmonaire diagnostiqué chez un soignant, Lyon, France, 2004–2005. BEH. 2007;17:137–139.
- 38. Fraser T, G Kowalczyk J, Schmitt S, Bernstein J, Terpeluk P, Tomford JW et al. Active tuberculosis in a healthcare worker: are you ready? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009;1:80–82. pmid:19046056
- 39. Singhatiraj E, Corona R, Nugent K, Robinson M. Investigation of individuals exposed to a healthcare worker with cavitary pulmonary tuberculosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009;30:502–504. pmid:19344274
- 40. Bradshaw L, Davies E, Devine M, Flanagan P, Kelly P, O'Connor K et al. The role of the interferon gamma release assay in assessing recent tuberculosis transmission in a hospital incident. PLoS One. 2011;6:e20770. pmid:21695149
- 41. Fisher KE, Guaran R, Stack J, Simpson S, Krause W, For KD et al. Nosocomial pulmonary tuberculosis contact investigation in a neonatal intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34: 754–756. pmid:23739083
- 42. Belfield PW, Arnold AG, Williams SE, Bostock AD, Cooke NJ. Recent experience of tuberculosis in junior hospital doctors in Leeds and Bradford. Br J Dis Chest. 1984;78:313 316. pmid:6487524
- 43. Carbonne A, Poirier C, Antoniotti G, Burnat C, Delacourt C, Orzechowski C et al. Investigation of patient contacts of heath care workers with infectious tuberculosis: 6 cases in the Paris area. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2005;8:848 852. pmid:16104629
- 44. Migueres B, Carbonne A, Abiteboul D, Poirier C, Bouvet E, Astagneau P. Tuberculosis among healthcare workers in Northern France (2002–2007): descriptive analysis of notified cases and contact tracing. Med Mal Infect. 2010;40:524–529. pmid:20430555
- 45. Anderson C, Abubakar I, Maguire H, Sonnenberg P. Survey of tuberculosis incidents in hospital healthcare workers, England and Wales, 2005. J Public Health (Oxf). 2007;29:292–297. pmid:17599921
- 46. Noël D, Antoine D, Thiolet JM, Poujol I, Che D. Investigations autour d’un cas de tuberculose chez un professionnel en milieu de soin, France, 2004–2007 Contact tracing for tuberculosis in healthcare settings, France, 2004–2007. BEH. 2009;18–19:187–189.
- 47. Roberts JR, Mason BW, Paranjothy S, Palmer SR. The transmission of tuberculosis in schools involving children 3 to 11 years of age. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2012;31:82–84. pmid:21941217
- 48. Leggiadro RJ, Callery B, Dowdy S, Larkin J. An outbreak of tuberculosis in a family day care home. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1989;8:52–4. pmid:2922238
- 49. Nolan CM, Barr H, Elarth AM, Boase J. Tuberculosis in a day-care home. Pediatrics. 1987;79:630–2. pmid:3822684
- 50. Dewan PK, Banouvong H, Abernethy N, Hoynes T, Diaz L, Woldemariam M et al. A tuberculosis outbreak in a private-home family child care center in San Francisco, 2002 to 2004. Pediatrics. 2006;117:863–9. pmid:16510668
- 51. Kaupas V. Tuberculosis in a family day-care home. Report of an outbreak and recommendations for prevention. JAMA. 1974;228:851–4. pmid:4207132
- 52. Rao VR, Joanes RF, Kilbane P, Galbraith NS. Outbreak of tuberculosis after minimal exposure to infection. Br Med J. 1980;281:187–9. pmid:7407515
- 53. Gaensbauer JT, Vandaleur M, O'Neil M, Altaf A, Ní Chróinín M. BCG protects toddlers during a tuberculosis outbreak. M. M Arch Dis Child. 2009;94:392–3. pmid:19190006
- 54. Aivazis V, Pardalos G, Kirkou-Thanou P, Starmouli K, Roilides E. Tuberculosis outbreak in a day care centre: always a risk. Acta Paediatr. 2004;93:140. pmid:14989455
- 55. Fox GJ, Barry SE, Britton WJ, Marks GB. Contact investigation for tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J. 2013;41:140–56. pmid:22936710
- 56. Muñoz FM, Ong LT, Seavy D, Medina D, Correa A, Starke JR. Tuberculosis among adult visitors of children with suspected tuberculosis and employees at a children’s hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2002;23:568–572. pmid:12400884
- 57. Moro ML, Gori A, Errante I, Infuso A, Franzetti F, Sodano L et al. An outbreak of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis involving HIV-infected patients of two hospitals in Milan, Italy. Italian Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis Outbreak Study Group. AIDS. 1998;12:1095–102. pmid:9662207
- 58. Harris TG, Sullivan Meissner J, Proops D. Delay in diagnosis leading to nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis at a New York City health care facility. Am J Infect Control. 2013;41:155–60. pmid:22750037
- 59. Nicholas P, Gayer M, Frieden TR, Fujiwara PI. A continuing outbreak of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, with transmission in a hospital nursery. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:303–7. pmid:9502446
- 60. Huang WL, Jou R, Yeh PF, Huang A. Outbreak Investigation Team. Laboratory investigation of a nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis at a district general hospital. J Formos Med Assoc. 2007;106:520–7. pmid:17660141
- 61. Zaza S, Blumberg HM, Beck-Sagué C, Haas WH, Woodley CL, Pineda M et al. Nosocomial transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: role of health care workers in outbreak propagation. J Infect Dis. 1995;172:1542–9. pmid:7594714
- 62. Marais BJ, Gie RP, Schaaf HS, Hesseling AC, Obihara CC, Starke JJ et al. The natural history of childhood intra-thoracic tuberculosis: a critical review of literature from the pre-chemotherapy era. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2004;8:392–402. pmid:15141729
- 63. Millership SE, Anderson C, Cummins AJ, Bracebridge S, Abubakar I.The risk to infants from nosocomial exposure to tuberculosis. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009;28:915–6. pmid:19687770
- 64.
Public Health England. TB incident and outbreak surveillance (TBIOS) http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/Tuberculosis/TBUKSurveillanceData/TBIncidentAndOutbreakSurveillance/(accessed 15 October 2013).
- 65. Grime PR, Jeffs C, Sayed HGM, MacKenzie P and Lipman MCI. Limited value of annual tuberculosis symptom reminders for health care workers. Occup Med (London.) 2011;61:274–276. pmid:21525064