CClinicalTrials.gg
WithdrawnNCT00214708Updated Feb 6, 2025

Can Screening People Registering With Primary Care Improve the Detection of Tuberculosis?

An observational study in Tuberculosis, sponsored by Barts & The London NHS Trust. Withdrawn at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged Up to 105 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-02-06.

Sponsored by Barts & The London NHS Trust · Observational

Why this study was withdrawn
Study withdrawn
Study type
Observational
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
0
Ages
Up to 105 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This randomised controlled trial tests whether screening people registering with general practices cost-effectively increases the detection of tuberculosis. The study objectives are to:

  1. recruit, and randomise with stratification, forty Hackney general practices to usual activity or screening for TB primarily during registration health checks (by practice nurses and GPs) and transfer-in visits for children (by health visitors)
  2. implement a screening programme comprising education, resources and clinical support for intervention practices using proven behaviour change strategies
  3. gather outcomes and costs
  4. build research capacity within an ELENoR Primary Care Research Team and across a Primary Care Trust.

The primary outcome is the proportion of TB cases identified in primary care. The study is powered to detect a 20% increase (from 55% to 75%) in the detection of new cases of TB in primary care with 80% power at the 5% significance level. Secondary outcomes are rates of prophylaxis for latent TB infection (LTBI), BCG immunisation, smear negative (early) TB and costs. Analyses will be by intention to treat.

Read the detailed description

To date, studies of screening for tuberculosis have used relatively weak designs. A randomised trial would give stronger evidence as to whether screening is worthwhile and therefore would be welcome. We have tested the feasibility of screening in two general practices in Hackney; our results suggest that it is simple and straightforward, that the people screened were comfortable taking part, and that screening does indeed identify people with tuberculosis.

How (or indeed whether) to screen for tuberculosis constitutes a major policy issue for inner city public health care. Our work will go some way toward answering this important question and will have local, national and international relevance. There are important benefits for those taking part. First, the project is part of a local health development scheme which encourages GPs to register refugees and asylum seekers. This means that a group of people who find it difficult to get health care will be more likely to be able to find a GP. Second, people registering with general practices who are screening will all have a brief discussion about tuberculosis when they attend a health check at the surgery. This will make people more informed about tuberculosis and help to remove the stigma that attends tuberculosis. Third, screening is likely to identify people with tuberculosis, or who need BCG vaccination to prevent tuberculosis. These people will benefit from early treatment or immunisation.

We will invite all general practices in Hackney to take part. Practices that agree will then be randomly allocated (by a computer programme) into two groups: practices who will screen and those who will carry on as usual without screening. The project researcher responsible for data collection will not know to which group the practices have been assigned. Practices allocated to the screening group will be offered a programme designed to encourage screening as part of the new patient registration checks (by practice nurses and GPs) and during children's transfer-in visits (by health visitors). The programme is founded on proven ways of helping people change how they work and includes the following: an education programme run by the primary care research team, with a local chest consultant as opinion leader; Heaf guns, Heaf heads, and tuberculin (to test for presence of TB); TB screening guidelines; regular support and advice from the local TB specialist nurse; incorporation of a TB screening template into the practice computer consulting system; and an incentive fee paid to the practices for carrying out the Heaf tests. TB identication rates for both groups will be ascertained after 25 months of screening. The cost of implementing the screening process will also be measured.

Patients / public involvment (subjects and partners):

People attending for new registration checks and children seen at transfer-in visits are the study participants. They will be informed about the study (using information sheets in various languages); they can decline to take part if they like. Public involvement in the design and execution of the study comes in three forms. First, the East London Refuge and Asylum seeker worker has contributed to the study design and will be involved throught the study. Second, the work is part of an East London Health Improvement Plan, which itself has public support. Third, the study has approval from the East London and Esssex Network of Researchers' Research Advisory Committee, which has two consumer representatives

02

Conditions studied

  • Tuberculosis

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Tuberculosis
  • Screening
  • Heaf
  • BCG
03

In context

Tuberculosis

1,417 studies on the registry are indexed under Tuberculosis; 208 are open to participants now.

Browse Tuberculosis studies →

Lead sponsor

Barts & The London NHS Trust is the lead sponsor of 149 studies on the registry; 21 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 105 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

The intervention is screening for TB in general practices which were randomised to control or intervention

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

Practices that refused to participate could not be included. We excluded the general practice where the pilot study was undertaken

05

Study design

Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
0 participants (actual)

Interventions

  • ProcedureScreening for Tuberculosis
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The primary outcome is the proportion of TB cases identified in primary care. The study is powered to detect a 20% increase (from 55% to 75%) in the detection of new cases of TB in primary care with 80% power at the 5% significance level.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Secondary outcomes are rates of prophylaxis for latent TB infection (LTBI), BCG immunisation, smear negative (early) TB and costs. Analyses will be by intention to treat.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • City and Hackney
    London, E9, United Kingdom
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Griffiths C, Sturdy P, Brewin P, Bothamley G, Eldridge S, Martineau A, MacDonald M, Ramsay J, Tibrewal S, Levi S, Zumla A, Feder G. Educational outreach to promote screening for tuberculosis in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007 May 5;369(9572):1528-1534. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60707-7. PubMed 17482983 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 6, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00214708
Lead sponsor
Barts & The London NHS Trust
Collaborators
NHS Research and Development
First posted
Sep 22, 2005
Start date
Jan 2002 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2002 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 2002 (estimated)
Last update
Feb 6, 2025

Study contacts

Chris J Griffiths, DPhil, MB BS
principal investigator · Queen Mary University of London
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is withdrawn, as verified in Feb 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion