Literature DB >> 24038608

Point-of-care testing: where is the evidence? A systematic survey.

Valentina Pecoraro, Luca Germagnoli, Giuseppe Banfi.   

Abstract

Point-of-care testing (POCT) has had rapid technological development and their use is widespread in clinical laboratories to assure reduction of turn-around-time and rapid patient management in some clinical settings where it is important to make quick decisions. Until now the papers published about the POCT have focused on the reliability of the technology used and their analytical accuracy. We aim to perform a systematic survey of the evidence of POCT efficacy focused on clinical outcomes, selecting POCT denoted special analytes characterized by possible high clinical impact. We searched in Medline and Embase. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility, extracted study details and assessed the methodological quality of studies. We analyzed 84 studies for five POCT instruments: neonatal bilirubin, procalcitonin, intra-operative parathyroid hormone, troponin and blood gas analysis. Studies were at high risk of bias. Most of the papers (50%) were studies of correlation between the results obtained by using POCT instruments and those obtained by using laboratory instruments. These data showed a satisfactory correlation between methods when similar analytical reactions were used. Only 13% of the studies evaluated the impact of POCT on clinical practice. POCT decreases the time elapsed for making decisions on patient management but the clinical outcomes have never been adequately evaluated. Our work shows that, although POCT has the potential to provide beneficial patient outcome, further studies may be required, especially for defining its real utility on clinical decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24038608     DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2013-0386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  11 in total

1.  The Role of Pharmacists and Pharmacy Education in Point-of-Care Testing.

Authors:  James P Kehrer; Deborah E James
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  Evaluation of a novel point-of-care test kit, ABSOGEN PCT, in semi-quantitative measurement of procalcitonin in whole blood.

Authors:  Hi Jeong Kwon; Jehoon Lee; Hae-Il Park; Kyungja Han
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2016-12-13       Impact factor: 2.352

3.  A Comparison Study Between Point-of-Care Testing Systems and Central Laboratory for Determining Blood Glucose in Venous Blood.

Authors:  Huiping Wei; Fang Lan; Qitian He; Haiwei Li; Fuyong Zhang; Xue Qin; Shan Li
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 2.352

4.  Diagnosis of acute serious illness: the role of point-of-care technologies.

Authors:  Gregory L Damhorst; Erika A Tyburski; Oliver Brand; Greg S Martin; Wilbur A Lam
Journal:  Curr Opin Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-09-16

5.  Patient perspectives on test result communication in primary care: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Ian J Litchfield; Louise M Bentham; Richard J Lilford; Richard J McManus; Sheila M Greenfield
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  Evaluation of optical detection platforms for multiplexed detection of proteins and the need for point-of-care biosensors for clinical use.

Authors:  Samantha Spindel; Kim E Sapsford
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 7.  The state of point-of-care testing: a European perspective.

Authors:  Anders Larsson; Roman Greig-Pylypczuk; Albert Huisman
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.384

8.  Comparability of Point-of-Care versus Central Laboratory Hemoglobin Determination in Emergency Patients at a Supra-Maximal Care Hospital.

Authors:  Ramona C Dolscheid-Pommerich; Sarah Dolscheid; Daniel Grigutsch; Birgit Stoffel-Wagner; Ingo Graeff
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Routine failures in the process for blood testing and the communication of results to patients in primary care in the UK: a qualitative exploration of patient and provider perspectives.

Authors:  Ian Litchfield; Louise Bentham; Ann Hill; Richard J McManus; Richard Lilford; Sheila Greenfield
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 7.035

10.  Clinical Laboratories - Production Factories or Specialized Diagnostic Centers.

Authors:  János Kappelmayer; Judit Tóth
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2016-04-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.