Cargando…

The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza are diagnostically superior to clinical diagnosis, but their impact on patient outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review of influenza POCTs versus usual care in ambulatory care settings. Studies were identified by searching six databases...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Joseph Jonathan, Verbakel, Jan Y, Goyder, Clare Rosemary, Ananthakumar, Thanusha, Tan, Pui San, Turner, Phillip James, Hayward, Gail, Van den Bruel, Ann
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6579962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30285232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy837
_version_ 1783427939658891264
author Lee, Joseph Jonathan
Verbakel, Jan Y
Goyder, Clare Rosemary
Ananthakumar, Thanusha
Tan, Pui San
Turner, Phillip James
Hayward, Gail
Van den Bruel, Ann
author_facet Lee, Joseph Jonathan
Verbakel, Jan Y
Goyder, Clare Rosemary
Ananthakumar, Thanusha
Tan, Pui San
Turner, Phillip James
Hayward, Gail
Van den Bruel, Ann
author_sort Lee, Joseph Jonathan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza are diagnostically superior to clinical diagnosis, but their impact on patient outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review of influenza POCTs versus usual care in ambulatory care settings. Studies were identified by searching six databases and assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Estimates of risk ratios (RR), standardised mean differences, 95% confidence intervals and I2 were obtained by random effects meta-analyses. We explored heterogeneity with sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. RESULTS: 12,928 citations were screened. Seven randomized studies (n = 4,324) and six non-randomized studies (n = 4,774) were included. Most evidence came from paediatric emergency departments. Risk of bias was moderate in randomized studies and higher in non-randomized studies. In randomized trials, POCTs had no effect on admissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61–1.42, I2 = 34%), returning for care (RR 1.00 95% CI = 0.77–1.29, I2 = 7%), or antibiotic prescribing (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82–1.15, I2 = 70%), but increased prescribing of antivirals (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.95–3.60; I2 = 0%). Further testing was reduced for full blood counts (FBC) (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.92 I2 = 0%), blood cultures (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.99; I2 = 0%) and chest radiography (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.96; I2 = 32%), but not urinalysis (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78–w1.07; I2 = 20%). Time in the emergency department was not changed. Fewer non-randomized studies reported these outcomes, with some findings reversed or attenuated (fewer antibiotic prescriptions and less urinalysis in tested patients). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care testing for influenza influences prescribing and testing decisions, particularly for children in emergency departments. Observational evidence shows challenges for real-world implementation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6579962
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65799622019-06-20 The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Lee, Joseph Jonathan Verbakel, Jan Y Goyder, Clare Rosemary Ananthakumar, Thanusha Tan, Pui San Turner, Phillip James Hayward, Gail Van den Bruel, Ann Clin Infect Dis Articles and Commentaries BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza are diagnostically superior to clinical diagnosis, but their impact on patient outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review of influenza POCTs versus usual care in ambulatory care settings. Studies were identified by searching six databases and assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Estimates of risk ratios (RR), standardised mean differences, 95% confidence intervals and I2 were obtained by random effects meta-analyses. We explored heterogeneity with sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. RESULTS: 12,928 citations were screened. Seven randomized studies (n = 4,324) and six non-randomized studies (n = 4,774) were included. Most evidence came from paediatric emergency departments. Risk of bias was moderate in randomized studies and higher in non-randomized studies. In randomized trials, POCTs had no effect on admissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61–1.42, I2 = 34%), returning for care (RR 1.00 95% CI = 0.77–1.29, I2 = 7%), or antibiotic prescribing (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82–1.15, I2 = 70%), but increased prescribing of antivirals (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.95–3.60; I2 = 0%). Further testing was reduced for full blood counts (FBC) (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.92 I2 = 0%), blood cultures (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.99; I2 = 0%) and chest radiography (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.96; I2 = 32%), but not urinalysis (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78–w1.07; I2 = 20%). Time in the emergency department was not changed. Fewer non-randomized studies reported these outcomes, with some findings reversed or attenuated (fewer antibiotic prescriptions and less urinalysis in tested patients). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care testing for influenza influences prescribing and testing decisions, particularly for children in emergency departments. Observational evidence shows challenges for real-world implementation. Oxford University Press 2019-07-01 2018-10-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6579962/ /pubmed/30285232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy837 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles and Commentaries
Lee, Joseph Jonathan
Verbakel, Jan Y
Goyder, Clare Rosemary
Ananthakumar, Thanusha
Tan, Pui San
Turner, Phillip James
Hayward, Gail
Van den Bruel, Ann
The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_fullStr The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_short The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_sort clinical utility of point-of-care tests for influenza in ambulatory care: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Articles and Commentaries
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6579962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30285232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy837
work_keys_str_mv AT leejosephjonathan theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT verbakeljany theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT goyderclarerosemary theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ananthakumarthanusha theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tanpuisan theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT turnerphillipjames theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT haywardgail theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vandenbruelann theclinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT leejosephjonathan clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT verbakeljany clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT goyderclarerosemary clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ananthakumarthanusha clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tanpuisan clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT turnerphillipjames clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT haywardgail clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vandenbruelann clinicalutilityofpointofcaretestsforinfluenzainambulatorycareasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis