Cost evaluation of point-of-care testing for community-acquired influenza in adults presenting to the emergency department

Clinical impact of rapid molecular diagnostic tests in patients presenting with viral respiratory symptoms: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Molecular tests can detect lower concentrations of viral genetic material over a longer period of respiratory infection than antigen tests. Delays associated with central laboratory testing can result in hospital-acquired transmission, avoidable patient admission, and unnecessary use of antimicrobials, all which may lead to increased cost of patient management. The aim of this study was to summarize comparisons of clinical outcomes associated with rapid molecular diagnostic tests (RMDTs) versus other diagnostic tests for viral respiratory infections.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) conducted in April 2023 identified studies evaluating clinical outcomes of molecular and antigen diagnostic tests for patients suspected of having respiratory viral infections.

RESULTS

The SLR included 21 studies, of which seven and 14 compared RMDTs (conducted at points of care or at laboratories) to standard (non-rapid) molecular tests or antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, respectively. In studies testing for SARS-CoV-2, RMDTs led to reductions in time to test results versus standard molecular tests (range of the reported medians: 0.2-3.8 hours versus 4.3-35.9 hours), with similar length of emergency department stay (3.2-8 hours versus 3.7-28.8 hours). Similarly, in studies testing for influenza, RMDTs led to reductions in time to test results versus standard molecular tests (1-3.5 hours versus 18.2-29.2 hours), with similar length of emergency department stay (3.7-11 hours versus 3.8-11.9 hours). RMDTs were found to decrease exposure time of uninfected patients, rate of hospitalization, length of stay at the hospitals, and frequency of unnecessary antiviral and antibacterial therapy, while improving patient flow, compared to other tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to other diagnostic tests, RMDTs improve clinical outcomes, test turnaround time, and stewardship by decreasing unnecessary use of antibiotics and antivirals. They also reduce hospital admission and length of stay, which may, in turn, reduce unnecessary exposure of patients to hospital-acquired infections and their associated costs.

Single centre experience: Managing seasonal influenza without a point-of-care test

Background

The use of point-of-care testing (POCT) for influenza is not routine in many hospitals in the United Kngdom and testing is currently by laboratory-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. This review aims to evaluate patients who were tested positive for influenza in the last winter season and project if future POCT usage at initial point of patient assessment could assist in better utilisation of healthcare resources.

Methods

Retrospective review in a district general hospital without POCT facility for influenza. Medical records of patients who tested positive for influenza during a 4-month period from 1 October 2019 to 31 January 2020 in the paediatric department were reviewed and analysed.

Results

Thirty patients had laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza of which 63% (n = 19) were admitted to the ward. 56% of patients were not isolated at first instance on admission and 50% (n = 9) of admitted patients did not require inpatient management which totalled up to 224 h length of stay in ward.

Conclusions

Routine POCT for influenza can potentially improve management of patients presenting with respiratory symptoms and allocation of healthcare resources. We recommend its use to be introduced in diagnostic pathways for acute respiratory illness in the paediatric population in the next winter season in all hospitals.

COVID-19 rapid molecular point-of-care testing is effective and cost-beneficial for the acute care of trauma patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy and cost benefit of a rapid molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) device detecting COVID-19 within a traumatological emergency department.

BACKGROUND

Despite continuous withdrawal of COVID-19 restrictions, hospitals will remain particularly vulnerable to local outbreaks which is reflected by a higher institution-specific basic reproduction rate. Patients admitted to the emergency department with unknown COVID-19 infection status due to a- or oligosymptomatic COVID-19 infection put other patients and health care workers at risk, while fast diagnosis and treatment is necessary. Delayed testing results in additional costs to the health care system.

METHODS

From the 8th of April 2021 until 31st of December 2021, all patients admitted to the emergency department were tested with routine RT-PCR and rapid molecular POCT device (Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19). COVID-19-related additional costs for patients admitted via shock room or emergency department were calculated based on internal cost allocations.

RESULTS

1133 rapid molecular tests resulted in a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI 35.9-99.6%), specificity of 99.8% (95% CI 99.4-100%), a positive predictive value of 71.4% (95% CI 29-96.3%) and a negative predictive value of 99.9% (95% CI 99.5-100%) as compared to RT-PCR. Without rapid COVID-19 testing, each emergency department and shock room admission with subsequent surgery showed additional direct costs of 2631.25€, without surgery of 729.01€.

CONCLUSION

Although rapid molecular COVID-19 testing can initially be more expensive than RT-PCR, subsequent cost savings, improved workflows and workforce protection outweigh this effect by far. The data of this study support the use of a rapid molecular POCT device in a traumatological emergency department.

Clinical utility of a rapid 'on-demand' laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing service in an acute hospital setting admitting COVID-19 patients

Background

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, hospital clinical teams have realised that there is a need for a rapid, accurate testing facility that will allow them to move patients quickly into isolation rooms or specific COVID-19 cohort wards as soon as possible after admission.

Methods

Starting from July 2020, PCR-based test platforms, which could test 4–8 samples in parallel with turnaround (sample-to-result) times of 50–80 min, were placed in a satellite laboratory. This laboratory was on the same floor and within walking distance to the acute respiratory admissions ward. It was staffed by a team of three mid-Band 4 staff that split a 0700–2200 h-work day, 7 days a week, with 2 senior supervisors. Urgent sample testing was decided upon by the clinical teams and requested by phone. The test results were entered manually in real-time as they became available, and sent electronically to the requesting ward teams.

Results

The daily/monthly PCR positive test numbers approximately followed the local and national UK trend in COVID-19 case numbers, with the daily case numbers being reflective of the November and December 2020 surges. Test results were used to rapidly segregate positive patients into dedicated COVID-19 ward areas to minimise risk of potential nosocomial transmission in crowded waiting areas. Testing capacity was sufficient to include cases with uncertain diagnosis likely to require hospital admission. Following completion of other admission processes, based on these rapid test results, patients were allocated to dedicated COVID-19 positive or negative cohort wards.

Conclusions

This rapid testing facility reduced unnecessary ‘length-of-stay’ in a busy acute respiratory ward. In the current absence of a treatment for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, on which patients could be discharged home to complete, the rapid test facility has become a successful aid to patient flow and reduced exposure and nosocomial transmission.