Cargando…

Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the literature regarding the use of point-of-care test (POCT) in pharmacies versus control/usual care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis in community pharmacy. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Albasri, Ali, Van den Bruel, Ann, Hayward, Gail, McManus, Richard J, Sheppard, James Peter, Verbakel, Jan Yvan Jos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7232628/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32414821
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034298
_version_ 1783535431544995840
author Albasri, Ali
Van den Bruel, Ann
Hayward, Gail
McManus, Richard J
Sheppard, James Peter
Verbakel, Jan Yvan Jos
author_facet Albasri, Ali
Van den Bruel, Ann
Hayward, Gail
McManus, Richard J
Sheppard, James Peter
Verbakel, Jan Yvan Jos
author_sort Albasri, Ali
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To summarise the literature regarding the use of point-of-care test (POCT) in pharmacies versus control/usual care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis in community pharmacy. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ClinicalTrial.gov and Web of Science databases were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if they: involved a POCT conducted by a community pharmacist, member of pharmacy staff or local equivalent; measured a clinically relevant outcome for example, clinical parameter monitoring. No clinical condition or language limits were set. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: No patient involvement. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were independently extracted by two members of the review team to capture changes in clinical care that resulted from the use of the POCTs. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed, using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Thirteen of the 1584 articles found were included in the meta-analyses. Studies covered four therapeutic areas: targeted anti-malarial therapy (n=3 studies), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in diabetes (n=2 studies), lipid control (n=3 studies) and international normalised ratio (INR) control in patients taking warfarin (n=5 studies). POCT in pharmacies reduced the risk of receiving antimalarial treatment when not clinically indicated (risk ratio 0.34, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.37). Lipid and HbA1c control appeared largely unaffected by pharmacy POCTs, and the impact on INR time-in-therapeutic-range was inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Only 4 out of 13 included studies used a gold-standard randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, limiting our ability to conclusively determine the clinical utility of POCT conducted in pharmacies. Further RCTs are needed, particularly in areas such as upper respiratory tract infections, which have gathered momentum among service commissioners in recent years. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017048578.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7232628
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72326282020-05-19 Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis Albasri, Ali Van den Bruel, Ann Hayward, Gail McManus, Richard J Sheppard, James Peter Verbakel, Jan Yvan Jos BMJ Open Pathology OBJECTIVES: To summarise the literature regarding the use of point-of-care test (POCT) in pharmacies versus control/usual care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis in community pharmacy. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ClinicalTrial.gov and Web of Science databases were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if they: involved a POCT conducted by a community pharmacist, member of pharmacy staff or local equivalent; measured a clinically relevant outcome for example, clinical parameter monitoring. No clinical condition or language limits were set. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: No patient involvement. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were independently extracted by two members of the review team to capture changes in clinical care that resulted from the use of the POCTs. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed, using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Thirteen of the 1584 articles found were included in the meta-analyses. Studies covered four therapeutic areas: targeted anti-malarial therapy (n=3 studies), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in diabetes (n=2 studies), lipid control (n=3 studies) and international normalised ratio (INR) control in patients taking warfarin (n=5 studies). POCT in pharmacies reduced the risk of receiving antimalarial treatment when not clinically indicated (risk ratio 0.34, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.37). Lipid and HbA1c control appeared largely unaffected by pharmacy POCTs, and the impact on INR time-in-therapeutic-range was inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Only 4 out of 13 included studies used a gold-standard randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, limiting our ability to conclusively determine the clinical utility of POCT conducted in pharmacies. Further RCTs are needed, particularly in areas such as upper respiratory tract infections, which have gathered momentum among service commissioners in recent years. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017048578. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7232628/ /pubmed/32414821 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034298 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Pathology
Albasri, Ali
Van den Bruel, Ann
Hayward, Gail
McManus, Richard J
Sheppard, James Peter
Verbakel, Jan Yvan Jos
Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort impact of point-of-care tests in community pharmacies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Pathology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7232628/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32414821
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034298
work_keys_str_mv AT albasriali impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vandenbruelann impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT haywardgail impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mcmanusrichardj impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sheppardjamespeter impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT verbakeljanyvanjos impactofpointofcaretestsincommunitypharmaciesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis