Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests for toenail onychomycosis: a repeated-measure, single-blinded, cross-sectional evaluation of 7 diagnostic tests. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006 Oct;55(4):620-6
Lilly KK, Koshnick RL, Grill JP, Khalil ZM, Nelson DB, Warshaw EM
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of the most commonly used diagnostic tests for onychomycosis: potassium hydroxide preparation (KOH), interpreted both by a dermatologist (KOH-CLINIC) and a laboratory technician (KOH-LAB); KOH with dimethyl sulfoxide (KOH-DMSO) and with chlorazol black E (KOH-CBE), interpreted by a dermatologist; culture using dermatophyte test medium, culture with Mycobiotic and Inhibitory Mold Agar (Cx); and histopathologic analysis using periodic acid-Schiff stain (PAS).
METHODS: This was a repeated-measure, blinded, cross-sectional study conducted at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Inclusion criteria included: at least one toenail with 25% or more clinical disease, which was defined as subungual debris with onycholysis and/or onychauxis. Exclusion criteria included other nail dystrophies, use of oral antifungal medication for 2 months or longer within the past year, or topical ciclopirox lacquer within 6 weeks of enrollment. The main outcome measure was the cost-effectiveness (Medicare and non-Medicare costs) of 7 diagnostic tests. Sensitivity (at least 3 positive tests) was the unit of effectiveness.
RESULTS: Two hundred four participants were enrolled; their average age was 69.5 years and 95.5% were male. PAS was the most sensitive test (98.8%); it was statistically significantly more sensitive than all other diagnostic tests except KOH-CBE (94.3%). Dermatophye test medium was the least sensitive test (57.3%). KOH-CBE was statistically significantly more cost effective than any other test, with the exception of KOH-CLINIC and KOH-LAB. PAS was the least cost effective. LIMITATIONS: Test specificities were not evaluated.
CONCLUSION: KOH-CBE should be the test of choice for practitioners confident in interpreting KOH preparations because of its combination of high sensitivity and cost-effectiveness.