• 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.

The clinical utility of point-of-care tests for influenza in ambulatory care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Oct 4. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy837. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]The clinical utility of point-of-care tests for influenza in ambulatory care: A systematic review and meta-analysis.[/h] Lee JJ[SUP]1[/SUP], Verbakel JY[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP], Goyder CR[SUP]1[/SUP], Ananthakumar T[SUP]1[/SUP], Tan PS[SUP]1[/SUP], Turner PJ[SUP]1[/SUP], Hayward G[SUP]1[/SUP], Van den Bruel A[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]Background:[/h] Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza are diagnostically superior to clinical diagnosis, but their impact on patient outcomes is unclear.
[h=4]Methods:[/h] 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.
[h=4]Results:[/h] 12,928 citations were screened. Seven randomised studies (n=4,324) and six non-randomised studies (n=4,774) were included. Most evidence came from paediatric emergency departments. Risk of bias was moderate in randomised studies and higher in non-randomised studies. In randomised 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 0.78-1.07; I2=20%). Time in the emergency department was not changed. Fewer non-randomised studies reported these outcomes, with some findings reversed or attenuated (fewer antibiotic prescriptions and less urinalysis in tested patients).
[h=4]Conclusions:[/h] 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.


PMID: 30285232 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy837
 
Back
Top Bottom