Karl G Nicholson1, Keith R Abrams2, Sally Batham1, Marie Jo Medina1, Fiona C Warren3, Mike Barer4, Alison Bermingham5, Tristan W Clark1, Nicholas Latimer6, Maria Fraser7, Nelun Perera7, K Rajakumar4, Maria Zambon5. 1. Infectious Diseases Unit, Vaccine Evaluation Centre, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust and Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 2. Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester Medical School, Leicester, UK. 3. Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. 4. Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 5. Health Protection Agency, Centre for Infections, London, UK. 6. Health Economics and Decision Science (HEDS), School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 7. Department of Microbiology, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Western industrialised nations face a large increase in the number of older people. People over the age of 60 years account for almost half of the 16.8 million hospital admissions in England from 2009 to 2010. During 2009-10, respiratory infections accounted for approximately 1 in 30 hospital admissions and 1 in 20 of the 51.5 million bed-days. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy and clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of rapid molecular and near-patient diagnostic tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and Streptococcus pneumoniae infections in comparison with traditional laboratory culture. METHODS: We carried out a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate impact on prescribing and clinical outcomes of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza A and B and pneumococcal infection, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for influenza A and B and RSV A and B, and conventional culture for these pathogens. We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of POCTs for influenza and pneumococcal infection, RT-PCR for influenza and sputum culture for S. pneumoniae using samples collected during the RCT. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of POCTs for influenza A and B. We evaluated ease and speed of use of each test, process outcomes and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: There was no evidence of association between diagnostic group and prescribing or clinical outcomes. Using PCR as 'gold standard', Quidel Influenza A + B POCT detected 24.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.0% to 34.6%] of influenza infections (specificity 99.7%, 95% CI 99.2% to 99.9%); viral culture detected 21.6% (95% CI 13.5% to 31.6%; specificity 99.8%, 95% CI 99.4% to 100%). Using blood culture as 'gold standard', BinaxNOW pneumococcal POCT detected 57.1% (95% CI 18.4% to 90.1%) of pneumococcal infections (specificity 92.5%; 95% CI 90.6% to 94.1%); sputum culture detected 100% (95% CI 2.5% to 100%; specificity 97.2%, 95% CI 94.3% to 98.9%). Overall, pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity of POCTs for influenza from the literature were 74% (95% CI 67% to 80%) and 99% (95% CI 98% to 99%), respectively. Median intervals from specimen collection to test result were 15 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 10-23 minutes) for Quidel Influenza A + B POCT, 20 minutes (IQR 15-30 minutes) for BinaxNOW pneumococcal POCT, 50.8 hours (IQR 44.3-92.6 hours) for semi-nested conventional PCR, 29.2 hours (IQR 26-46.9 hours) for real-time PCR, 629.6 hours (IQR 262.5-846.7 hours) for culture of influenza and 84.4 hours (IQR 70.7-137.8 hours) and 71.4 hours (IQR 69.15-84.0 hours) for culture of S. pneumoniae in blood and sputum, respectively. Both POCTs were rated straightforward and undemanding; blood culture was moderately complex and all other tests were complex. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of each diagnostic strategy were similar. Incrementally, PCR was most cost-effective (78.3% probability at a willingness to pay of £20,000/QALY). Few patients were admitted within a timescale conducive to treatment with a neuraminidase inhibitor according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. LIMITATIONS: The accuracy study was limited by inadequate gold standards. CONCLUSIONS: All tests had limitations. We found no evidence that POCTs for influenza or S. pneumoniae, or PCR for influenza or RSV influenced antimicrobial prescribing or clinical outcomes. The total costs and QALYs of each diagnostic strategy were similar, although, incrementally, PCR was the most cost-effective strategy. The analysis does not support routine use of POCTs for either influenza or pneumococcal antigen for adults presenting with acute cardiopulmonary conditions, but suggests that conventional viral culture for clinical diagnosis should be replaced by PCR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21521552. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
BACKGROUND: Western industrialised nations face a large increase in the number of older people. People over the age of 60 years account for almost half of the 16.8 million hospital admissions in England from 2009 to 2010. During 2009-10, respiratory infections accounted for approximately 1 in 30 hospital admissions and 1 in 20 of the 51.5 million bed-days. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy and clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of rapid molecular and near-patient diagnostic tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and Streptococcus pneumoniae infections in comparison with traditional laboratory culture. METHODS: We carried out a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate impact on prescribing and clinical outcomes of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza A and B and pneumococcal infection, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for influenza A and B and RSV A and B, and conventional culture for these pathogens. We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of POCTs for influenza and pneumococcal infection, RT-PCR for influenza and sputum culture for S. pneumoniae using samples collected during the RCT. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of POCTs for influenza A and B. We evaluated ease and speed of use of each test, process outcomes and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: There was no evidence of association between diagnostic group and prescribing or clinical outcomes. Using PCR as 'gold standard', Quidel Influenza A + B POCT detected 24.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.0% to 34.6%] of influenza infections (specificity 99.7%, 95% CI 99.2% to 99.9%); viral culture detected 21.6% (95% CI 13.5% to 31.6%; specificity 99.8%, 95% CI 99.4% to 100%). Using blood culture as 'gold standard', BinaxNOW pneumococcal POCT detected 57.1% (95% CI 18.4% to 90.1%) of pneumococcal infections (specificity 92.5%; 95% CI 90.6% to 94.1%); sputum culture detected 100% (95% CI 2.5% to 100%; specificity 97.2%, 95% CI 94.3% to 98.9%). Overall, pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity of POCTs for influenza from the literature were 74% (95% CI 67% to 80%) and 99% (95% CI 98% to 99%), respectively. Median intervals from specimen collection to test result were 15 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 10-23 minutes) for Quidel Influenza A + B POCT, 20 minutes (IQR 15-30 minutes) for BinaxNOW pneumococcal POCT, 50.8 hours (IQR 44.3-92.6 hours) for semi-nested conventional PCR, 29.2 hours (IQR 26-46.9 hours) for real-time PCR, 629.6 hours (IQR 262.5-846.7 hours) for culture of influenza and 84.4 hours (IQR 70.7-137.8 hours) and 71.4 hours (IQR 69.15-84.0 hours) for culture of S. pneumoniae in blood and sputum, respectively. Both POCTs were rated straightforward and undemanding; blood culture was moderately complex and all other tests were complex. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of each diagnostic strategy were similar. Incrementally, PCR was most cost-effective (78.3% probability at a willingness to pay of £20,000/QALY). Few patients were admitted within a timescale conducive to treatment with a neuraminidase inhibitor according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. LIMITATIONS: The accuracy study was limited by inadequate gold standards. CONCLUSIONS: All tests had limitations. We found no evidence that POCTs for influenza or S. pneumoniae, or PCR for influenza or RSV influenced antimicrobial prescribing or clinical outcomes. The total costs and QALYs of each diagnostic strategy were similar, although, incrementally, PCR was the most cost-effective strategy. The analysis does not support routine use of POCTs for either influenza or pneumococcal antigen for adults presenting with acute cardiopulmonary conditions, but suggests that conventional viral culture for clinical diagnosis should be replaced by PCR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21521552. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Authors: Justin J O'Hagan; Karen K Wong; Angela P Campbell; Anita Patel; David L Swerdlow; Alicia M Fry; Lisa M Koonin; Martin I Meltzer Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Timothy M Uyeki; Henry H Bernstein; John S Bradley; Janet A Englund; Thomas M File; Alicia M Fry; Stefan Gravenstein; Frederick G Hayden; Scott A Harper; Jon Mark Hirshon; Michael G Ison; B Lynn Johnston; Shandra L Knight; Allison McGeer; Laura E Riley; Cameron R Wolfe; Paul E Alexander; Andrew T Pavia Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Sam T Douthwaite; Charlotte Walker; Elisabeth J Adams; Catherine Mak; Andres Vecino Ortiz; Nuria Martinez-Alier; Simon D Goldenberg Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Xiao Jiang; Julia C Loeb; Maohua Pan; Trevor B Tilly; Arantza Eiguren-Fernandez; John A Lednicky; Chang-Yu Wu; Z Hugh Fan Journal: Anal Chim Acta Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 6.911
Authors: Stephen J Walters; Inês Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby; Oscar Bortolami; Laura Flight; Daniel Hind; Richard M Jacques; Christopher Knox; Ben Nadin; Joanne Rothwell; Michael Surtees; Steven A Julious Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Léon Nshimyumukiza; Xavier Douville; Diane Fournier; Julie Duplantie; Rana K Daher; Isabelle Charlebois; Jean Longtin; Jesse Papenburg; Maryse Guay; Maurice Boissinot; Michel G Bergeron; Denis Boudreau; Christian Gagné; François Rousseau; Daniel Reinharz Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Richard K Zimmerman; G K Balasubramani; Mary Patricia Nowalk; Heather Eng; Leonard Urbanski; Michael L Jackson; Lisa A Jackson; Huong Q McLean; Edward A Belongia; Arnold S Monto; Ryan E Malosh; Manjusha Gaglani; Lydia Clipper; Brendan Flannery; Stephen R Wisniewski Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2016-09-22 Impact factor: 3.667