The findings indicate that the prevalence of TB among children in this study, using both CXR and GeneXpert, was found to be 13.8% which falls within the range identified in previous research projecting a global burden of 10–20% TB cases in children under 15 years old [6], [5]. This suggests that the prevalence of TB Arthur Davison Children’s Hospital is consistent with the global trend. This prevalence is slightly higher than the rate reported by Nishtar et al. in 2022, which was 9.7%.
The study also revealed that GeneXpert identified 8.6% of the 1825 patients with positive CXR results. This rate is significantly higher than the 1.4% positive rate reported in the current study. The substantial difference in detection rates between GeneXpert and CXR indicates that GeneXpert may be more effective in identifying TB cases in this context, supporting its potential as a valuable diagnostic tool for tuberculosis in children.
Comparing these results with the study by Wekesa et al. in 2014, it is evident that there are the GeneXpert positivity rates also reported a lower positivity rate of GeneXpert to CXR, which was 17% and 42.5%, respectively.
Children have traditionally been considered a lower public health risk for TB because they rarely develop lung cavities and most of them do not produce sputum [13–15]. As a result, diagnosing TB in children can be challenging. The accurate identification of pediatric TB still presents several diagnostic problems [20, 2]. This poses a significant obstacle to effectively managing and treating TB in children.
This study reveals that children in the age range of 0–4 years were slightly more affected, with a prevalence rate of 68.4%, compared to those between 5–10 years, who had a prevalence rate of 31.6%. This disparity may be due to various factors, such as differences in exposure or immune responses among different age groups.
Interestingly, this study found that out of the 19 patients who tested positive for TB, only 2 (11%) were positive on Gene X-pert and X-ray examinations. In contrast, all 17 patients (89%) were only identified as positive through X-ray imaging and not detected by Gene X-pert. This confirms the hypothesis that when gastric lavage samples are used on Gene X-pert, there is a lower TB positivity rate in children under 10 years of age at this hospital compared to when X-ray imaging is employed.
Studies conducted by Wekesa et al. in 2014 and Nishtar et al. in 2022 have reported higher rates of false positives on CXR in the context of TB diagnosis. False positives occur when the CXR results suggest the presence of TB, but upon further evaluation, the individuals do not actually have active TB infection.
In the study by Wekesa et al. (2014), they found a higher rate of false positives with CXR, where 42.5% of patients had CXR results suggestive of TB, but only 17% of them tested positive using GeneXpert, which served as the gold standard. This discrepancy in the results indicates that CXR may lead to an overestimation of TB cases, leading to unnecessary treatment or additional investigations for those who do not have active TB.
Similarly, in the study by Nishtar et al. (2022), the sensitivity of CAD4TB, a diagnostic tool based on CXR, was reported to be 83.2%, while its specificity was only 12.7%, using GeneXpert as the reference standard. The low specificity indicates that CAD4TB had a high rate of false positives, where many individuals who did not have TB were identified as potentially having the disease based on CXR results.
Overall, the discussion highlights the importance of considering different diagnostic methods' performance in diagnosing TB among children. While CXR remains a widely used tool, GeneXpert appears to demonstrate higher specificity and may be more effective in detecting TB cases (30), as evidenced by the significantly higher positivity rate in the larger patient sample analyzed in this study. However, further research and larger-scale studies are required to validate these findings and assess the diagnostic accuracy of GeneXpert and CXR in various populations. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each diagnostic tool will aid in developing targeted and efficient TB detection strategies for children, particularly in high-burden regions like Zambia.
Limitations
The study was conducted at a single hospital, Arthur Davison Children's Hospital, for only a two-month period. This limited scope may not capture the full range of TB prevalence and diagnostic challenges in paediatric populations in Zambia. Additionally, the study may have been subject to selection bias as it focused only on patients within a specific age range who sought treatment at a single hospital. This could introduce a bias towards more severe cases or exclude certain subpopulations, potentially impacting the accuracy and generalizability of the findings.