Point-of-care testing in the pharmacy: how is the field evolving?

Pharmacy-based immunization: a systematic review

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has prompted the exploration of new response strategies for such health contingencies in the near future. Over the last 15 years, several pharmacy-based immunization (PBI) strategies have emerged seeking to exploit the potential of pharmacies as immunization, medication sale, and rapid test centers. However, the participation of pharmacies during the last pandemic was very uneven from one country to another, suggesting a lack of consensus on the definition of their roles and gaps between the literature and practice.

Purpose

This study aimed to consolidate the current state of the literature on PBI, document its progress over time, and identify the gaps not yet addressed. Moreover, this study seeks to (i) provide new researchers with an overview of the studies on PBI and (ii) to inform both public health and private organization managers on the range of possible immunization models and strategies.

Methodology

A systematic review of scientific qualitative and quantitative studies on the most important scientific databases was conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyzes guidelines were followed. Finally, this study discusses the trends, challenges, and limitations on the existing literature on PBI.

Findings

Must studies concluded that PBI is a beneficial strategy for the population, particularly in terms of accessibility and territorial equity. However, the effectiveness of PBI is affected by the economic, political, and/or social context of the region. The collaboration between the public (government and health departments) and private (various pharmacy chains) sectors contributes to PBI's success.

Originality

Unlike previous literature reviews on PBI that compiled qualitative and statistical studies, this study reviewed studies proposing mathematical optimization methods to approach PBI.

Implementing community pharmacy-based influenza point-of-care test-and-treat under collaborative practice agreement

Background

Early and accessible testing for influenza with point-of-care testing (POCT) can be a critical factor for deciding to begin antiviral treatment. More than 10,000 pharmacies across the USA offer Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-waived POCT for infectious diseases, such as influenza A/B. Knowledge of barriers and facilitators to large-scale POCT implementation may be useful in scaling POCT for influenza test-and-treat services (Flu POCT). The objective of this study was to explore the experiences of pharmacists who were early adopters of Flu POCT and treatment under collaborative practice agreement in community pharmacy settings.

Methods

Qualitative research design with in-depth, semi-structured virtual video interviews of licensed US community pharmacists. Interview questions were derived from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviewees were selected via a purposeful sampling of pharmacists who were enrolled in a nationwide clinical trial involving pharmacy-based influenza test-and-treat under a collaborative agreement. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. A deductive analytic approach was used via constructs from the CFIR.

Results

Six pharmacists were interviewed. Interviews ranged from 28 to 70 min, with an average length of 46 min. Four broad themes emerged from the data, and each had corresponding subthemes and supporting quotes: influence of the Flu POCT service characteristics on pharmacy implementation, influence of factors outside of the pharmacy setting in Flu POCT implementation, factors within the pharmacy setting influencing implementation, and process of implementing Flu POCT. A novel pharmacy-based Flu POCT implementation framework is presented.

Conclusions

Implementation of community pharmacy-based Flu POCT services is feasible; but, a thorough understanding of both barriers and facilitators to their implementation is needed to increase the spread and scale of these programs. Specifically, pharmacy stakeholders should focus efforts on increasing patient and provider awareness, pharmacist acceptance, leadership support, and support of health providers external to the pharmacy to improve implementation success.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00324-z.

Evaluation of Point-of-Care Testing in Pharmacy to Inform Policy Writing by the New Brunswick College of Pharmacists

Pharmacy practice continues to advance, allowing professionals to contribute further to patient care and the healthcare system. Pharmacists are authorized to perform point-of-care testing (POCT) in seven out of ten Canadian provinces. In considering the potential for enhanced clinical decision-making with the opportunity to gain patient data at the site of care, the New Brunswick College of Pharmacists (NBCP) proceeded to draft regulatory amendments and a policy to enable POCT scope in New Brunswick. Policy writing is a core function of Provincial Regulatory Authorities in Canada as the process determines principles that direct pharmacy practice. Each province has a differing scope of practice and method for developing documents. This paper highlights the approach, analysis, and findings of the NBCP pursuant to drafting a POCT policy. The policy development process included a literature search and environmental scan of the ten Canadian provincial regulatory authorities along with other countries. The findings highlighted in this paper describe the use of POCT, quality assurance, regulatory framework, educational opportunities, and the role of pharmacy technicians in relation to POCT in a pharmacy setting. The approach NBCP took to engage professionals and decisions on the direction of the policy are described. As point-of-care services continue to expand in pharmacies, the insights by the NBCP can be utilized by other regulatory bodies or pharmacy professionals who are implementing or enhancing POCT policies or procedures within their organizations.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on addressing common barriers to pharmacy-based point-of-care testing

Introduction: Pharmacy-based point-of-care testing has long had the potential to improve patient access to timely care, but adoption has been slowed by financial and regulatory barriers. The COVID-19 pandemic reduced or temporarily eliminated many of the barriers to pharmacy-based testing. This review examines how the changes brought on by may impact pharmacy-based testing after the pandemic.Areas covered: This review searched peer-reviewed, lay, and regulatory literature to explore the implementation of pharmacy-based COVID-19 testing. This includes a review of regulatory and financial changes that removed barriers to testing. Additionally, it reviews the literature related to the growth of pharmacy-based testing.Expert opinion: It is clear that the COVID-19 pandemic created an awareness and opportunity for pharmacy-based point-of-care testing. The changes made in response to the pandemic have the potential to increase the role of pharmacy-based testing, but additional regulatory changes and wider pharmacy adoption are still needed to maximize the value of such services.

Point-of-Care Testing Practices, Failure Modes, and Risk-Mitigation Strategies in Emergency Medical Services Programs in the Canadian Province of Alberta

CONTEXT.—

Emergency medical services (EMS) programs have been using point-of-care testing (POCT) for more than 20 years. However, only a handful of reports have been published in all of that time on POCT practices in field settings.

OBJECTIVE.—

To provide an overview of POCT practices and failure modes in 3 of Alberta's EMS programs, and to propose risk-mitigation strategies for reducing or eliminating these failure modes.

DESIGN.—

Details about POCT practices, failure modes, and risk-mitigation strategies were gathered through (1) conversations with personnel, (2) in-person tours of EMS bases, (3) accompaniment of EMS personnel on missions, (4) internet searches for publicly available information, and (5) a review of laboratory documents.

RESULTS.—

Practices were most standardized and robust in the community paramedicine program (single service provider, full laboratory oversight), and least standardized and robust in the air ambulance program (4 service providers, limited laboratory oversight). Common failure modes across all 3 programs included device inoperability due to cold weather, analytical validation procedures that failed to consider the unique challenges of EMS settings, and a lack of real-time electronic transmission of results into the health care record.

CONCLUSIONS.—

A provincial framework for POCT in EMS programs is desirable. Such a framework should include appropriate funding models, laboratory oversight of POCT, and relevant expertise on POCT in EMS settings. The framework should also incorporate specific guidance on quality standards that are needed to address the unique challenges of performing POCT in field settings.

Development and Implementation of an Influenza Point-Of-Care Testing Service in a Chain Community Pharmacy Setting

Point-of-care testing is becoming increasingly commonplace in community pharmacy settings. These tests are often used in the management of chronic disease, such as blood sugar, hemoglobin A1c and lipid levels, but can also be used for acute conditions such as influenza infection and group A streptococcus pharyngitis. When used for these acute infections, point-of-care tests can allow for pharmacist-initiated treatment. In this study, an influenza point-of-care testing service was developed and implemented in a chain community pharmacy setting and a retrospective review was conducted to assess the service. Of patients tested, 29% tested positive for influenza A and/or B; 92% of patients testing positive received a prescription as a result. While health insurance cannot be billed for the service due to current pharmacy reimbursement practices, this did not appear to negatively affect patient willingness to participate. As point-of-care testing services become more commonplace in community pharmacy settings, patient awareness will similarly increase and allow for more widespread access to acute outpatient care.

Pharmacy-Based Infectious Disease Management Programs Incorporating CLIA-Waived Point-of-Care Tests

There are roughly 48,000 deaths caused by influenza annually and an estimated 200,000 people who have undiagnosed human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). These are examples of acute and chronic illnesses that can be identified by employing a CLIA-waived test. Pharmacies across the country have been incorporating CLIA-waived point-of-care tests (POCT) into disease screening and management programs offered in the pharmacy. The rationale behind these programs is discussed. Additionally, a summary of clinical data for some of these programs in the infectious disease arena is provided. Finally, we discuss the future potential for CLIA-waived POCT-based programs in community pharmacies.

Looking Back at US Pharmacy’s Past to Help Discern Its Future

Objective: To review specific literature that aimed to predict the future of US pharmacy, beginning in the late 1980s. Data Sources: Articles were identified from searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and references of relevant articles. The following combinations of search terms were used: future, pharmacy, prediction, and forecast. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) full-text commentary, review, or original research and (2) focused predominantly on the pharmacy in the United States. Data on predictions for the future of pharmacy were extracted. Data Synthesis: We selected 3 articles published between 1988 and 2006, with each aiming to project the future for the following decade. We examined each prediction in light of the current knowledge. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Educators, practitioners, and other stakeholders should consider reflecting on the changes in pharmacy for the past 3 decades and applying both historical and emerging trends to improve patient care and sustain practice in the third decade of the 21st century and beyond. Conclusion: Most of the predictions for the future of pharmacy from the past 3 decades materialized, with some still in progress (reimbursement for pharmacy services), whereas others manifested in unexpected ways (transition from shortage to excess of pharmacists). Current forces shaping pharmacy include, but are not limited to, growing spending and use of specialty drugs, automation of pharmacy operations, growth of pharmacy in the digital health enterprise, and growing consumer interest in the use of analytical pharmacy that tests drugs before dispensing.

Pharmacists' Opinions on the Implementation of HIV and HepC Point-of-Care-Testing in a U.S. Pharmacy Chain

Background:

The role of community pharmacists continues to expand with immunizations, medication therapy management, and point-of-care testing (POCT). Current guidelines recommend that Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and Hepatitis C (HCV) testing become integrated into routine care. Current guidelines recommend all people aged 13-64 be tested for HIV at least once in their lifetime, with those at higher risk for HIV tested at least annually.¹ Regarding HCV, current guidelines recommend a one-time HCV test in persons born from 1945 to 1965, as well as other individuals based on exposures, behaviors, and conditions or circumstances that increase HCV infection risk.² Currently available HIV and HCV treatment regimens are safe and highly effective. With HCV, successful treatment can halt disease progression to cirrhosis, end-stage liver disease, and hepatocellular carcinoma.³ POCT in community pharmacy offers an ideal location due to its accessibility, convenience, and lower cost to patients who might not otherwise be tested. However, HIV and HCV screenings are not routinely conducted by community pharmacists due to many barriers. Though many barriers to HIV and HCV POCT have been identified at the patient, provider, and institutional level, little is known about pharmacist-perceived barriers. It is worth noting that the barrier of state legislation limiting POCT in pharmacies has been resolved – currently 49 states have some form of statute that allows for delegation of prescriptive authority between a prescriber and community pharmacist.⁴ Though this removed barrier means increased availability of POCT, as the studies above have demonstrated, the mere availability of POCT is not enough for its implementation.

Objective:

The main objective of this study is to identify pharmacist-perceived barriers and their level of confidence in performing community pharmacy-based POCT for HIV and HCV.

Methods:

A cross-sectional survey was sent to all pharmacists working in a regional grocery store chain to evaluate their opinions and attitudes toward the implementation of POCT for HIV and HCV. The electronic survey questions consisted of Likert scale, select-all-thatapply, yes/no and no open-ended questions.

Results:

The perceived barriers to implementation of HIV and HCV POCT in a community setting identified by pharmacists include staffing, time to conduct test, patient out-of-pocket cost, and discussion of positive results. Pharmacists' perceived level of confidence was greatest with providing basic education and incorporating HIV and HCV POCT into workflow; whereas discussion of a positive result was perceived as less confident.

Conclusions:

While this survey determined pharmacist support for the implementation of HIV and HCV POCT, additional studies are needed before effective implementation of HIV and HCV POCT in a community pharmacy chain.

Laboratory Evaluation of a Commercially Available Rapid Syphilis Test

Serological diagnosis of syphilis depends on assays that detect treponemal and nontreponemal antibodies. Laboratory certification and trained personnel are needed to perform most of these tests, while high costs and long turnaround time can hinder treatment initiation or linkage to care. A rapid treponemal syphilis test (RST) that is simple to perform, accessible, and inexpensive would be ideal. The Syphilis Health Check (SHC) assay is the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived RST in the United States. In this study, 1,406 archived human serum samples were tested using SHC and traditional treponemal and nontreponemal assays. Rapid test results were compared with treponemal data alone and with a laboratory test panel consensus defined as being reactive by both treponemal and nontreponemal assays for a given specimen, or nonreactive by both types of assays. The sensitivity and specificity of the SHC assay compared with treponemal tests alone were 88.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.2 to 90.0%) and 93.1% (95% CI, 90.0 to 94.9%), respectively, while comparison with the laboratory test panel consensus showed 95.7% (95% CI, 93.6 to 97.2%) sensitivity and 93.2% (95% CI, 91.0 to 95.1%) specificity. The data were further stratified based on age, sex, pregnancy, and HIV status. The sensitivity and specificity of the SHC assay ranged from 66.7% (95% CI, 46.0 to 83.5%) to 91.7% (95% CI, 87.7 to 94.7%) and 88% (95% CI, 68.8 to 97.5%) to 100% (95% CI, 47.8 to 100%), respectively, across groups compared to traditional treponemal assays, generally increasing for all groups except the HIV-positive (HIV+) population when factoring in the laboratory test panel consensus. These data contribute to current knowledge of the SHC assay performance for distinct populations and may guide use in various settings.