Literature DB >> 14510177

Quality in point-of-care testing.

James H Nichols1.   

Abstract

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is an increasingly popular means of providing laboratory testing at or near to the site of patient care. POCT provides rapid results and has the potential to improve patient outcome from earlier treatment. However, a faster result is not necessarily an equivalent result to traditional, core laboratory testing. Preanalytic, analytic and postanalytic factors can influence the quality of POCT and lead to misinterpretation. Concerns over the quality of POCT have resulted in a hierarchy of laboratory regulations in the USA and POCT guidelines are appearing in a number of countries worldwide. Quality POCT must control every aspect of the test and testing process that can affect the ultimate result. Laboratory quality regulations are very similar to industrial quality requirements and POCT can be viewed like any manufacturing business where the product being produced is the test result. Use of industrial management techniques, such as failure mode and effects analysis, can be applied to POCT to isolate and reduce the sources of testing error. Data management is fundamental to quality. Analyzing POCT data can show quality trends before they affect the result. Newer POCT devices have computerized data capture and storage functions that can collect the key information at the time the test is performed and later transmit that data to a POCT data manager or hospital information system. Recent standards, such as the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards POCT1-A, provide a connectivity standard to allow different POCT devices to share a common interface and data manager system, reducing the cost of implementing and maintaining POCT. Guaranteeing POCT quality is resource-intensive and as healthcare budgets get tighter and staffing shortages grow, patient outcome must be weighed against available resources to determine optimum testing strategies. Use of the POCT literature can help establish an evidence-based justification to support POCT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14510177     DOI: 10.1586/14737159.3.5.563

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn        ISSN: 1473-7159            Impact factor:   5.225


  8 in total

1.  Hemoglobin test result variability and cost analysis of eight different analyzers during open heart surgery.

Authors:  Kirti P Patel; Gary W Hay; Mahesh Keitheri Cheteri; David W Holt
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2007-03

2.  A rationale for parsimonious laboratory term mapping by frequency.

Authors:  Daniel J Vreeman; John T Finnell; J Marc Overhage
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2007-10-11

3.  Reducing patient identification errors related to glucose point-of-care testing.

Authors:  Gaurav Alreja; Namrata Setia; James Nichols; Liron Pantanowitz
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2011-05-11

4.  An artificial intelligence-assisted diagnostic platform for rapid near-patient hematology.

Authors:  Neta Bachar; Dana Benbassat; David Brailovsky; Yochay Eshel; Dan Glück; Daniel Levner; Sarah Levy; Sharon Pecker; Evgeny Yurkovsky; Amir Zait; Cordelia Sever; Alexander Kratz; Carlo Brugnara
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 13.265

5.  Best Practices in the Implementation of a Point of Care Testing Program: Experience From a Tertiary Care Hospital in a Developing Country.

Authors:  Aysha Habib Khan; Shahid Shakeel; Khairunnissa Hooda; Kashif Siddiqui; Lena Jafri
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2019-10-11

Review 6.  Practical challenges related to point of care testing.

Authors:  Julie L V Shaw
Journal:  Pract Lab Med       Date:  2015-12-09

7.  Agreement Between Serum Assays Performed in ED Point-of-Care and Hospital Central Laboratories.

Authors:  Meir Dashevsky; Steven L Bernstein; Carol L Barsky; Richard A Taylor
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2017-03-13

Review 8.  Point-of-care testing (POCT): Current techniques and future perspectives.

Authors:  Peter B Luppa; Carolin Müller; Alice Schlichtiger; Harald Schlebusch
Journal:  Trends Analyt Chem       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 12.296

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.