SARS-CoV-2 screening in patients in need of urgent inpatient treatment in the Emergency Department (ED) by digitally integrated point-of-care PCR: A clinical cohort study

Effects of Different SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategies in the Emergency Department on Length of Stay and Clinical Outcomes: A Randomised Controlled Trial

The turn-around-time (TAT) of diagnostic and screening measures such as testing for SARS-CoV-2 can affect a patient's length of stay (LOS) in the hospital as well as the emergency department (ED). This, in turn, can affect clinical outcomes. Therefore, a reliable and time-efficient SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy is necessary, especially in the ED. In this randomised controlled trial, n = 598 ED patients presenting to one of three university hospital EDs in Berlin, Germany, and needing hospitalisation were randomly assigned to two intervention groups and one control group. Accordingly, different SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies were implemented: rapid antigen and point-of-care (POC) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rtPCR) testing with the Roche cobas® Liat® (LIAT) (group one n = 198), POC rtPCR testing with the LIAT (group two n = 197), and central laboratory rtPCR testing (group three, control group n = 203). The median LOS in the hospital as an inpatient across the groups was 7 days. Patients' LOS in the ED of more than seven hours did not differ significantly, and furthermore, no significant differences were observed regarding clinical outcomes such as intensive care unit stay or death. The rapid and POC test strategies had a significantly (p < 0.01) shorter median TAT (group one 00:48 h, group two 00:21 h) than the regular central laboratory rtPCR test (group three 06:26 h). However, fast SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies did not reduce ED or inpatient LOS significantly in less urgent ED admissions. Testing strategies should be adjusted to the current circumstances including crowding, SARS-CoV-2 incidences, and patient cohort. This trial is registered with DRKS00023117.

A study to assess the impact of the cobas point-of-care RT-PCR assay (SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A/B) on patient clinical management in the emergency department of the University of California at Davis Medical Center

BACKGROUND

Rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for reduction of transmission and clinical decision-making. Several rapid (<30 min) molecular point-of-care (POC) tests based on nucleic acid amplification exist for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B infections.

METHODS

This unblinded, pre-post study enrolled consecutive patients with symptoms/signs consistent with SARS-CoV-2 infection presenting to the University of California, Davis emergency department (ED). Outcomes following implementation of the cobas® SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B test for use on the cobas Liat System (intervention: December 2020-May 2021) were compared with previous standard-of-care using centralized laboratory reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) methods (control: April 2020-October 2020).

RESULTS

Electronic health records of 8879 symptomatic patient visits were analyzed, comprising 4339 and 4540 visits and 538 and 638 positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results in the control and intervention periods, respectively. Compared with the control period, turnaround time (TAT) was shorter in the intervention period (median 0.98 vs 12.30 h; p < 0.0001). ED length of stay (LOS) was generally longer in the intervention period compared with the control period, but for those SARS-CoV-2-negative who were admitted, ED LOS was shorter (median 12.53 vs 17.93 h; p < 0.0001). The rate of antibiotic prescribing was lower in the intervention than in the control period (42.86% vs 49.16%; p < 0.0001) and antiviral prescribing was higher (7.64% vs 5.49%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This real-world study confirms faster TAT with a POC RT-PCR method in an emergency care setting and highlights the importance of rapid SARS-CoV-2 detection to aid patient management and inform treatment decisions.

Preparing for the next pandemic: lessons learnt from the implementation of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 testing in an emergency department

Point-of-care testing (POCT) provides rapid, accurate results that facilitate diagnosis and patient management. POCT for infectious agents allows timely infection prevention and control interventions and informs decisions around safe patient placement. However, POCT implementation requires careful governance as they are primarily operated by staff with limited prior education on laboratory quality control and assurance processes. Here, we describe our experience implementing SARS-CoV-2 POCT in the emergency department of a large tertiary referral hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe collaborative governance between pathology and clinical specialities, quality assurance, testing (volume and positivity rates), impact on patient flow and focus on lessons learnt during implementation that should be incorporated into revised pandemic preparedness planning.

Clinical evaluation of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH): A point-of-care PCR test for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

An ideal test for COVID-19 would combine the sensitivity of laboratory-based PCR with the speed and ease of use of point-of-care (POC) or home-based rapid antigen testing. We evaluated clinical performance of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH) SARS-CoV-2 POC rapid PCR test.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of adults with and without symptoms of COVID-19 at four clinical sites where we collected two bilateral anterior nasal swabs and information on COVID-19 symptoms, vaccination, and exposure. One swab was tested with the DASH SARS-CoV-2 POC PCR and the second in a central laboratory using Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR. We assessed test concordance and calculated sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values using Xpert as the "gold standard".

RESULTS

We enrolled 315 and analyzed 313 participants with median age 42 years; 65% were female, 62% symptomatic, 75% had received ≥2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and 16% currently SARS-CoV-2 positive. There were concordant results for 307 tests indicating an overall agreement for DASH of 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 0.99] compared to Xpert. DASH performed at 0.96 [95% CI 0.86, 1.00] sensitivity and 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 1.00] specificity, with a positive predictive value of 0.85 [95% CI 0.73, 0.96] and negative predictive value of 0.996 [95% CI 0.99, 1.00]. The six discordant tests between DASH and Xpert all had high Ct values (>30) on the respective positive assay. DASH and Xpert Ct values were highly correlated (R = 0.89 [95% CI 0.81, 0.94]).

CONCLUSIONS

DASH POC SARS-CoV-2 PCR was accurate, easy to use, and provided fast results (approximately 15 minutes) in real-life clinical settings with an overall performance similar to an EUA-approved laboratory-based PCR.