• 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.

Molecular point-of-care testing for influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus: comparison of workflow parameters for the ID Now and cobas Liat sys

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Clin Pathol. 2019 Dec 11. pii: jclinpath-2019-206242. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2019-206242. [Epub ahead of print] [h=1]Molecular point-of-care testing for influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus: comparison of workflow parameters for the ID Now and cobas Liat systems.[/h]
Young S[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP], Phillips J[SUP]3[/SUP], Griego-Fullbright C[SUP]2[/SUP], Wagner A[SUP]2[/SUP], Jim P[SUP]2[/SUP], Chaudhuri S[SUP]4[/SUP], Tang S[SUP]4[/SUP], Sickler J[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h] 1 Department of Pathology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA Steve.Young@tricore.org. 2 TriCore Reference Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 3 Roche Diagnostics Corp, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA. 4 Roche Molecular Systems Inc, Pleasanton, California, USA.

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]AIMS:[/h] Point-of-care (POC) tests for influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) offer the potential to improve patient management and antimicrobial stewardship. Studies have focused on performance; however, no workflow assessments have been published comparing POC molecular tests. This study compared the Liat and ID Now systems workflow, to assist end-users in selecting an influenza and/or RSV POC test.
[h=4]METHODS:[/h] Staffing, walk-away and turnaround time (TAT) of the Liat and ID Now systems were determined using 40 nasopharyngeal samples, positive for influenza or RSV. The ID Now system requires separate tests for influenza and RSV, so parallel (two instruments) and sequential (one instrument) workflows were evaluated.
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] The ID Now ranged 4.1-6.2 min for staffing, 1.9-10.9 min for walk-away and 6.4-15.8 min for TAT per result. The Liat ranged 1.1-1.8 min for staffing, 20.0-20.5 min for walk-away and 21.3-22.0 min for TAT. Mean walk-away time comprised 38.0% (influenza positive) and 68.1% (influenza negative) of TAT for ID Now and 93.7% (influenza/RSV) for Liat. The ID Now parallel workflow resulted in medians of 5.9 min for staffing, 9.7 min for walk-away and 15.6 min for TAT. Assuming prevalence of 20% influenza and 20% RSV, the ID Now sequential workflow resulted in medians of 9.4 min for staffing, 17.4 min for walk-away, and 27.1 min for TAT.
[h=4]CONCLUSIONS:[/h] The ID Now and Liat systems offer different workflow characteristics. Key considerations for implementation include value of both influenza and RSV results, clinical setting, staffing capacity, and instrument(s) placement.
? Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] POC testing; diagnostics; virology

PMID: 31826935 DOI: 10.1136/jclinpath-2019-206242
Free full text
 
Back
Top Bottom