Skip to main content Accessibility help

Derivation and Validation of a Clinical Prediction Score for Isolation of Inpatients With Suspected Pulmonary Tuberculosis

  • Kara S. Rakoczy (a1), Stuart H. Cohen (a2) and Hien H. Nguyen (a1) (a2)



The use of a clinical prediction score to improve the practice of instituting airborne-transmission precautions in patients with suspected tuberculosis holds promise for increasing appropriate isolation and decreasing unnecessary isolation. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a clinical prediction score for patients with suspected tuberculosis.


We used a case—control study design to evaluate differences between patients with a diagnosis of tuberculosis and those placed under airborne precautions who had negative culture results. We developed risk scores based on a multivariable analysis of independently significant factors associated with tuberculosis. Subsequently, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the score in a separate (validation) cohort of patients.


Within our population, we found 4 clinical factors associated with tuberculosis: chronic symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 10.2 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.95-35.4]), upper lobe disease on chest radiograph (OR, 5.27 [95% CI, 1.6-17.23]), foreign-born status (OR, 7.01 [95% CI, 2.1-23.8]), and immunocompromised state other than human immunodeficiency virus infection (OR, 8.14 [95% CI, 2.08-31.8]). Shortness of breath (OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.04-0.45]) was found to be associated with non-tuberculosis diagnoses and considered a negative predictor in the model. Using a cut-off point to maximize sensitivity, we applied the prediction rule to the validation cohort, resulting in a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 42%.


The tuberculosis prediction rule derived from our patient population could improve utilization of airborne precautions. Clinical prediction rules continue to show their utility for improvement in isolation practices in different demographic areas.


Corresponding author

4150 V. Street, Suite G500, Sacramento, CA95817 (


Hide All
1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for preventing the transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in health-care facilities, 2005. MMWR Recomm Rep 2005;54:1141.
2.Sokolove, PE, Rossman, L, Cohen, SH. The emergency department presentation of patients with active pulmonary tuberculosis. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:10561060.
3.Scott, B, Schmid, M, Nettleman, MD. Early identification and isolation of inpatients at high risk for tuberculosis. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:326330.
4.Wisnivesky, J, Kaplan, J, Henschke, C, McGinn, TG, Crystal, RG. Evaluation of clinical parameters to predict Mycobacterium tuberculosis in inpatients. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:24712476.
5.Wisnivesky, J, Henschke, C, Balentine, J, Willner, C, Deloire, AM, McGinn, TG. Prospective validation of a prediction model for isolating inpatients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:453457.
6.Pegues, C, Johnson, DC, Pegues, DA. Implementation and evaluation of an algorithm for isolation of patients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:412418.
7.Bock, NN, McGowan, JE, Ahn, J. Clinical predictors of tuberculosis as a guide for a respiratory isolation policy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;154:14681472.
8.Knirsch, CA, Jain, NL, Pablos-Mendez, A, Friedman, C, Hripcsak, G. Respiratory isolation of tuberculosis patients using clinical guidelines and an automated clinical decision support system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998;19:94100.
9.Tattevin, P, Casalino, E, Fleury, L, Egmann, G, Ruel, M, Bouvet, E. The validity of medical history, classic symptoms, and chest radiographs in predicting pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest 1999;115:12481253.
10.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Reported tuberculosis in the United States, 2006. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; September 2007.
11.Cohen, R, Muzaffar, S, Capellan, J, Azar, H, Chinikamwala, M. The validity of classic symptoms and chest radiographic configuration in predicting pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest 1996;109:420512.
12.Randolph, AG, Guyatt, GH, Calvin, JE, et al.Understanding articles describing clinical prediction tools. Crit Care Med 1998;26:16031612.
13.Slovis, BS, Plitman, JD. The case against anergy testing as a routine adjunct to tuberculin skin testing. JAMA 2000;283:20032007.
14.Poduval, RD, Hammes, MS. Tuberculosis screening in dialysis patients—is the tuberculin test effective? Clinical Nephrology 2003;59:436440.
15.American Thoracic Society (ATS). ATS guidelines: diagnostic standards and classification of tuberculosis in adults and children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:13761395.
16.Wolfe, F, Michaud, K, Anderson, J, Urbansky, K. Tuberculosis infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and the effect of infliximab therapy. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:372379.
17.Gomez-Reino, JJ, Carmona, L, Valverde, VR, Mola, EM, Montero, MD. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may predispose to significant increase in tuberculosis risk: a multicenter active-surveillance report. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:21222127.
18.Feingold, AO. Association of tuberculosis with alcoholism. South Med J 1976;69:13361337.
19.Friedman, LN, Sullivan, GM, Bevilaqua, RP, Loscos, R. Tuberculosis screening in alcoholics and drug addicted. Am Rev Resp Dis 1987;136:11881192.
20.Macgregor, RR. Alcohol and immune defense. JAMA 1986;256:14741479.
21.Pitchenik, AE, Rubinson, HA. Radiographic appearance of tuberculosis in patients with the acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;131:393396.
22.Cobo, J, Oliva, J, Asensio, A, et al.Predicting tuberculosis among HIV-infected patients admitted to hospital: comparison of a model with clinical judgment of infectious diseases specialists. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2001;20:779784.


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed