Home | About us | Editorial Board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submissionContact Us   |  Subscribe   |  Advertise   |  Login  Page layout
Wide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout
Lung India Official publication of Indian Chest Society  
  Users Online: 291   Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2009  |  Volume : 26  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 3-4

Sputum smear microscopy in DOTS: Are three samples necessary? An analysis and its implications in tuberculosis control

Department of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases, Yenepoya Medical College, Deralakatte, Mangalore - 575 018, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Sukhesh Rao
''Hemadri", 2nd cross, Behind S.D.M. Law College, Kodialbail, Mangalore - 575 003, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-2113.45196

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: To assess relevance of spot morning spot (SMS) method of smear microscopy in tuberculosis control by directly observed treatment short course (DOTS). Materials and Methods : Screening of smear microscopy results of 546 cases of pulmonary tuberculosis at our DOTS centre. Results: Among 546 cases, 82% had all three samples positive for AFB, 98% had either morning sample or spot and morning sample positive. 2% had second spot sample positive. Conclusion: Examination of third sample, especially second spot sample, does not add significantly to the diagnostic yield. Examination of one spot and early morning samples were able to correctly diagnose 98% cases. This has strong implications in DOTS strategies.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded553    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal