• 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.

Point-of-care tests for infection control: should rapid testing be in the laboratory or at the front line?

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Hosp Infect. 2013 Aug 2. pii: S0195-6701(13)00222-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.06.005. [Epub ahead of print]
Point-of-care tests for infection control: should rapid testing be in the laboratory or at the front line?
Moore C.
Source

Public Health Wales Microbiology Cardiff, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff CF14 4XW, UK. Electronic address: catherine.moore2@wales.nhs.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

A point-of-care test (POCT) offers a rapid result to manage a patient immediately. The presumed simplicity of such tests belies observed variation between personnel in performing and interpreting results when not appropriately trained. The number of point-of-care devices being developed for the diagnosis of infectious diseases is increasing; by understanding the limitations associated with their use, such tests for infection control purposes may be possible.
AIM:

To review the expanding repertoire of POCTs for the diagnosis of infectious diseases and to assess their utility as tools to aid in the reduction of hospital-acquired infection and outbreak management.
METHODS:

A systematic review using PubMed and Scopus of published literature on the subject of POCTs for the diagnosis of infectious diseases.
FINDINGS:

Although the number of publications describing POCTs is increasing, there remains a paucity of literature describing their use in a clinical setting. Of the literature reviewed, POCTs for the diagnosis of respiratory syncytial virus and norovirus have the greatest utility in an infection control setting, although the data suggest that sensitivity and training issues might be a problem. The future generation of POCT devices is likely to be molecular-based, improving sensitivity but at a significant cost to the user.
CONCLUSIONS:

POCTs have a role in infection control but currently the lack of good, consistent clinical data surrounding their use outside of the laboratory is a limiting factor in their implementation.

? 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of the Healthcare Infection Society.
KEYWORDS:

Infection control, Influenza, Norovirus, Rapid test, Respiratory syncytial virus

PMID:
23916892
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23916892
 
Back
Top Bottom