| Literature DB >> 30407405 |
Issac J Michael1, Tae-Hyeong Kim2, Vijaya Sunkara3, Yoon-Kyoung Cho4,5.
Abstract
The advantages offered by centrifugal microfluidic systems have encouraged its rapid adaptation in the fields of in vitro diagnostics, clinical chemistry, immunoassays, and nucleic acid tests. Centrifugal microfluidic devices are currently used in both clinical and point-of-care settings. Recent studies have shown that this new diagnostic platform could be potentially used in extreme point-of-care settings like remote villages in the Indian subcontinent and in Africa. Several technological inventions have decentralized diagnostics in developing countries; however, very few microfluidic technologies have been successful in meeting the demand. By identifying the finest difference between the point-of-care testing and extreme point-of-care infrastructure, this review captures the evolving diagnostic needs of developing countries paired with infrastructural challenges with technological hurdles to healthcare delivery in extreme point-of-care settings. In particular, the requirements for making centrifugal diagnostic devices viable in developing countries are discussed based on a detailed analysis of the demands in different clinical settings including the distinctive needs of extreme point-of-care settings.Entities:
Keywords: centrifugal microfluidics; clinical chemistry; developing countries; diagnostics; immunoassays; nucleic acid tests; point-of-care
Year: 2016 PMID: 30407405 PMCID: PMC6190358 DOI: 10.3390/mi7020032
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Life expectancies at birth in 1990 and 2013 for both sexes and different causes of life expectancy variation in different regions [26].
Clinical infrastructure in developing countries in Asia (South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, Oceania); Africa (Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa) and Latin America [32,33,34].
| Infrastructure Availability | Urban Health Centers or Hospitals (59%) | Primary Healthcare Centers (27%) | Non-Clinical Settings (14%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clean water | O | × | × |
| Electricity | O | Δ | × |
| Dust free environment | O | Δ | × |
| Cold storage | O | × | × |
| Stable temperature | O | × | × |
| Trained professional | O | O | × |
| Internet access | O | Δ | × |
Key: available (O), partially available (Δ), unavailable (×). Urban health centers or hospitals are usually established by the state or the central government and perform most diagnostic testing in their respective countries. Primary healthcare centers are found in rural areas, and are often connected to the urban hospital, and are minimally equipped, including, for instance, a microscope for cell counting, a manual or electric centrifuge, LFSs and reagents for other colorimetric tests. Non-clinical settings can be a patient’s home or a gathering in the common area of a village or other rural locations where a test is performed.
Figure 2Examples of IVD technology in different treatment settings. Clinical settings: (A) Aquios CL flow cytometer (Beckman Coulter, Inc., Brea, CA, USA) for CD-4 testing; (B) COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® TaqMan® HIV-1 Test, v2.0, (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA); (C) BD FACS Count Instrument with Kit (Absolute CD4+, CD8+, and CD3+ Counts), (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA). POC settings: (D) BD FACSPrestoTM (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA); (E) Pima CD4 Test (AlereTM, Waltham, MA, USA); (F) Samba II (DRW (US) Ltd., Sunnyvale, CA, USA), approved in a few African countries, yet to be certified by the World Health Organization (WHO). EPOCT settings: (G) CareStart™ Malaria RDT (Access Bio Korea, Inc., Seoul, Korea); (H) Alere Determine HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab Combo (AlereTM, Waltham MA, USA); (I) HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® dipstick Assay (ChemBio Diagnostics sytems, Inc., Medford, NY, USA) [38,39].
Figure 3Examples of centrifugal microfluidic-based diagnostic devices for POCT settings: (A) Piccolo® by Abaxis (Union City, CA, USA); (B) COBAS B101 by Roche Diagnostics (Indianapolis, IN, USA); (C) Gyro Lab Explore by Gyros (Uppsala, Sweden); (D) Spinit® by Biosurfit (Lisboa, Portugal); (E) LAB GEO ib10 from Samsung healthcare (South Korea); (F) Focus Dx (Quest) by 3M (Cypress, CA, USA).
Healthcare infrastructure-dependent requirements for biomedical devices [34].
| Healthcare Setting | Urban Health Centers or Hospitals | Primary Healthcare Centers | Non-Clinical Settings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Device used | Non-POCT | POCT | EPOCT |
| Sample type | All kinds of samples (Venous blood, saliva, sputum, urine, nasal fluid, | Minimally invasive samples (Finger prick blood, urine, saliva, | Minimally invasive samples (Finger prick blood, urine, saliva, |
| Sample volume | High (>1 mL Blood) | Low (<10 µL Blood) | Low (<10 µL Blood) |
| Sample preparation | Manual/Automatic | Semi-automatic | Automatic |
| Sampling Size | Many | One ~ Few | One |
| Existing laboratory equipment | Advanced | Simple (Centrifuge, light microscope, | None |
| Device footprint | Large | Medium | Hand-held |
| Power supply | Normal | Battery/normal | Battery |
| Operation difficulty | Low ~ High | Medium | Low |
| Processing time | Fast/moderate | Fast | Fast |
| Usage | Heavily used | Minimally used | Used on demand |
| Durability | Low | Medium | High |
| Device cost | High | Medium | Low |
| Consumable cost | Low ~ High | Low | Low |
| Diagnostics | Screening, Quantification | Screening, Quantification | Screening, Quantification |
| Medical data storage | Local, Cloud | Local, Cloud | Cloud |