• 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.

Multiplex PCR point of care testing versus routine, laboratory-based testing in the treatment of adults with respiratory tract infections: a quasi-ran

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
BMC Infect Dis. 2017 Oct 10;17(1):671. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2784-z.
[h=1]Multiplex PCR point of care testing versus routine, laboratory-based testing in the treatment of adults with respiratory tract infections: a quasi-randomised study assessing impact on length of stay and antimicrobial use.[/h] Andrews D[SUP]1[/SUP], Chetty Y[SUP]1[/SUP], Cooper BS[SUP]2,[/SUP][SUP]3[/SUP], Virk M[SUP]4[/SUP], Glass SK[SUP]5[/SUP], Letters A[SUP]6[/SUP], Kelly PA[SUP]1[/SUP], Sudhanva M[SUP]4[/SUP], Jeyaratnam D[SUP]7[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]BACKGROUND:[/h] Laboratory-based respiratory pathogen (RP) results are often available too late to influence clinical decisions such as hospitalisation or antibiotic treatment due to time delay in transport of specimens and testing schedules. Ward-based i.e. point of care (POC) testing providing rapid results may alter the clinical management pathway.
[h=4]METHODS:[/h] FilmArray? RP polymerase chain reaction (PCR) systems were placed in three in-patient and out-patient medical areas. Patients presenting with influenza-like illness /upper respiratory tract infection +/- lower RTI were recruited between January-July 2015. FilmArray? POC testing occurred on even days of the month (intervention) or routine, laboratory-based RP PCR testing +/- atypical serology on odd days (control). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were impact on the use of antimicrobials, readmissions, all-cause mortality, length of ward stay and turn-around time (TAT) (time to result from admission).
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] Of 606 eligible patients, 545 (89.9%) were included; 211 in the control arm and 334 in the intervention arm. 20% of control arm patients and 24% of intervention arm patients had an RP detected. POC testing was not associated with the primary outcome measure, length of stay, but reduced the TAT from 39.5 h to 19.0 h, p < 0.001. Only the prescribing decision differed between study arms, p < 0.001. When antivirals were given, the intervention was associated with a reduction in the median time to the first dose of 36 h and allowed appropriate treatment of mycoplasma infection.
[h=4]CONCLUSIONS:[/h] We found no association between respiratory PCR POC testing and length of stay or most of the secondary outcomes except the antimicrobial prescribing decision. This was probably due to a delay in initiating FilmArray? testing. Despite this, POC testing allowed time-critical antivirals to be given significantly faster, appropriate mycoplasma treatment and results were available considerably faster than routine, laboratory-based testing. Ward-staff of all grades performed POC testing without difficulty suggesting potential use across many divergent healthcare settings. Further studies evaluating the implementation of rapid respiratory PCR POC testing and the effect on length of stay and antimicrobial use are required.
[h=4]TRIAL REGISTRATION:[/h] ISRCTN10470967 , Retrospectively Registered, 30/6/2015.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Adults; Antimicrobial stewardship; FilmArray?; Length of stay; Multiplex PCR; Point of care; Respiratory pathogens; Respiratory tract infection; Respiratory viruses

PMID: 29017451 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2784-z
Free full text
 
Back
Top Bottom