• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Am J Infect Control . Performance- and cost-benefit analysis of an influenza point-of-care test compared to laboratory-based multiplex RT-PCR in th

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Am J Infect Control


. 2021 May 10;S0196-6553(21)00340-0.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2021.04.087. Online ahead of print.
Performance- and cost-benefit analysis of an influenza point-of-care test compared to laboratory-based multiplex RT-PCR in the emergency department


Myrte van der Kraan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Elke L Hobbelink[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jayant Kalpoe[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Sjoerd M Euser[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Dominic Snijders[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Dennis Souverein[SUP] 5 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Introduction: Influenza poses a heavy burden on emergency departments (ED) and hospital wards. Fast and reliable bedside tests are invaluable in obtaining indications for (cohort) droplet isolation precautions and improving patient flow. We performed a cost-benefit analysis comparing influenza point-of-care testing (POCT) to laboratory-based multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA).
Methods: Data of 275 ED presentations between January-April 2019 were analyzed. Patients received both POCT and MLPA to calculate POCT sensitivity and specificity. Costs were calculated for both a POCT and MLPA scenario, including costs for testing, admission, droplet isolation precautions and cleaning.
Results: In our study population, 34 patients (12%) were identified with influenza A. No cases of influenza B were identified. Mean(SD) age of the influenza positive patients was 75(18) years and 56% were male. The most common symptoms upon presentation were cough, malaise and fever, with 74%, 56% and 50%, respectively. Compared to MLPA, POCT yielded a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 98% and a negative predictive value of 99% for influenza A. Using POCT yielded a cost reduction of ?93,26 per patient.
Conclusion: Influenza POCT is an accurate and cost-beneficial method to differentiate between admission with or without droplet isolation precautions. It can be useful in clinical decision making and reducing pressure on ED and hospital beds in an influenza peak season, by enabling fast patient flow and cohort isolation.

Keywords: Influenza; cost-benefit; emergency department; point-of-care testing (POCT); reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).
 
Back
Top Bottom