Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:49:16.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Pseudo-Outbreak of Purified Protein Derivative Skin-Test Conversions Caused by Inappropriate Testing Materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

John C. Grabau ,
Daniel J. Burrows  and
Michelle L. Kern
John C. Grabau*
Affiliation:
Bureau of Tuberculosis Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York
Daniel J. Burrows
Affiliation:
Bureau of Tuberculosis Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York
Michelle L. Kern
Affiliation:
Bureau of Tuberculosis Control, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York
*
Bureau of Tuberculosis Control, New York State Department of Health, Empire State Plaza, Corning Tower, Room 840, Albany, NY 12237-0669
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To investigate a cluster of newly identified tuberculosis infections.

Design:

A field study was conducted including interviews; medical record reviews; checking of bills and invoices, pharmacy records, and drug manufacturer information; and clinical retesting.

Setting:

Community residential facilities providing comprehensive services to retarded adults.

Participants:

Twenty residential facility staff (not previously known to be purified protein derivative [PPD] positive).

Results:

Staff had been tested with 250 TU of PPD, and 9 of 20 were tuberculin positive. Retesting with 5 TU yielded no reaction.

Conclusions:

Reactions were attributable to testing with a product not recommended for routine PPD screening. Healthcare workers planting PPD Mantoux tests always should check the vials to ensure that the appropriate strength solution is being used.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 18 , Issue 8 , August 1997 , pp. 571 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Reported tuberculosis in the United States, 1995. 08 1996:5.Google Scholar
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Essential components of a tuberculosis prevention and control program; and screening for tuberculosis and tuberculosis infection in high risk population: recommendations from the Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis. MMWR 1995;44(RR-11):1.Google Scholar
3. Grabau, JC, DiFerdinando, GT, Novick LE False-positive tuberculosis skin test results. Public Health Rep 1995;110:703–706.Google Scholar
4. Chaparas, S, Vandiviere, HM, Melvin, I, Koch, G, Becker, C. Tuberculin test, variability with the Mantoux procedure. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;132:175–177.Google Scholar
5. Huebner, RE, Schein, MF, Bass, JB. The tuberculin skin test. Clin Infect Dis 1993;17:968–975.Google Scholar
6. Lifson, AR, Watters, JK, Thompson, S, Crane, CM, Wise, F. Discrepancies in tuberculin skin testing results with two commercial products in a population of intravenous drug users. J Infect Dis 1993;168:1048–1051.Google Scholar
7. Lanphear, BP, Linnemann, CC, Cannon, CG. A high false-positive rate of tuberculosis associated with Aplisol: an investigation among health care workers. J Infect Dis 1994;169:703–704.Google Scholar
8. Mellor, J. False-positive results of Mantoux tests. Can Med Assoc J 1985;132:1403.Google Scholar
9. Shands, JW, Boeff, D, Fauerbach, L, Gutekunst, RR. Tuberculin testing in a tertiary hospital: product variability. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:758–760.Google Scholar
10. Cieslak, JJ, Irwin, RG, Dougherty, PA, Miller, GM. A pseudoepidemic of tuberculin skin test conversion caused by a particular lot of purified protein derivative of tuberculin test solution. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995;14:392–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Gurevich, I, Landry, SM, Hunt, EH, et al. False-positive PPD reactions. Infect Control 1985;6:241–242.Google Scholar
12. American Thoracic Society. The tuberculin skin test. Am Rev Respir Dis 1981;124:356–363.Google Scholar
13. Blackshear, J, Bravo, E, Gesink, D, Davies, SF, Iber, C, Johnson, JR. False-positive tests with Parke-Davis Aplisol. Am Rev Respir Dis 1983;127:254.Google Scholar
14. Comstock, GW. False tuberculin test results. Chest 1975;68(suppl):465–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Nash, DR, Douglas, JE. Anergy in active pulmonary tuberculosis. A comparison between positive and negative reactors and an evaluation of 5 TU and 250 TU skin-test doses. Chest 1980;77:32–37.Google Scholar