Point-of-care testing for influenza in a university emergency department: A prospective 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.

Point-of-Care Tests' Role in Time Metrics of Urgent Interventions in Emergency Department; a Systematic Review of Literature

INTRODUCTION

Point-of-Care Testing (POCT) could be helpful in clinical decisions, treatment selection, monitoring, prognostication, operational decision-making, and resource utilization. This study aimed to review the role of POCT in time metrics of performing urgent interventions in the emergency department (ED) or disposition time to proper care.

METHODS

This was a systematic review of the literature based on the PRISMA statement. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched for studies reporting the application of the POCT in the ED with outcomes of the time to intervention or disposition.

RESULTS

After reviewing 3708 articles, 16 studies with 100,224 participants were included in this systematic review. There were 5 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 5 retrospective cohorts, 2 prospective cohorts, and 4 before-after studies. All studies were performed in an ED setting except for one study of prehospital EMS air medical transport. Different panels, ultrasound, cardiac parameters, echocardiography, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) POCTs were used in the studies. Regarding the outcome measures, studies with many types of patients referring to ED used different indices of time to intervention or time to disposition. Studies on different shock circumstances used the time to the first bolus of hydration or vasopressor or intravenous antibiotics for septic shock patients and central venous catheterization (CVC) placement time in one study. Time to imaging was considered as the outcome in some studies. Overall, there was a high risk of bias, especially in case of the randomization methods, and non-blinded designs in RCTs. There was lower possibility of bias in non-randomized studies but the studies did not have enough follow-ups and in case of studies using advanced panels of POCT, results do not seem to be easily applicable to public health care in many countries.

CONCLUSION

In synthesis of the evidence, all included studies were reporting the benefits of the POCT in decreasing the time to proper interventions and increasing the time to negative interventions in the last lines of critical care as well as the intubation and CVC placement.

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

Patients in need of urgent inpatient treatment were recruited prospectively. A rapid point of care polymerase chain reaction test (POC-PCR; Liat®) for SARS-CoV2 was conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) and a second PCR-test from the same swab was ordered in the central laboratory (PCR). POC-PCR analyzers were digitally integrated in the laboratory information system.

Overall, 160 ED patients were included. A valid POC-PCR-test result was available in 96.3% (n = 154) of patients. N = 16 patients tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus 2 (10.0%). The POC PCR test results were available within 102 minutes (median, interquartile range: 56–211), which was significantly earlier compared to the central laboratory PCR (811 minutes; interquartile range: 533–1289, P < 0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of the POC-PCR test was 100%. The implementation and digital laboratory information system integration was successfully done. Staff satisfaction with the POC process was high.

The POC-PCR testing in the ED is feasible and shows a very high diagnostic performance.

Trial registration: DRKS00019207

Point-of-care testing for influenza in a university emergency department: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza is a burden for emergency departments (ED). The aim of this study was to investigate whether point-of-care (POC) PCR testing can be used to reduce staff sick days and improve diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate whether point-of-care (POC) PCR testing can be used to reduce staff sick days and improve diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

METHODS

Using a cross-over design, the cobas® Liat® Influenza A/B POC PCR test (Liat) was compared with standard clinical practice during the 2019/2020 influenza season. All adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with fever (≥38°C) and respiratory symptoms were included. Primary end points were the prevalence of influenza infections in the ED and staff sick days. Secondary end points were frequency of antiviral and antibacterial therapy, time between admission and test result or treatment initiation, patient disposition, ED length of stay (LOS), and for inpatients mortality and LOS. Nurses were interviewed about handling and integration of POC testing. The occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infections coincided with the second half of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 828 patients were enrolled in the study. All 375 patients of the intervention group were tested with Liat, and 103 patients of them (27.6%) tested positive. During the intervention period, staff sick days were reduced by 34.4% (P = .023). Significantly, more patients in the intervention group received antiviral therapy with neuraminidase inhibitors (7.2% vs 3.8%, P = .028) and tested patients received antibiotics more frequently (40.0% vs 31.6%, P = .033). Patients with POC test were transferred to external hospitals significantly more often (5.6% vs 1.3%, P = .01).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that POC testing for influenza is useful in the ED, especially if it is heavily frequented by patients with respiratory symptoms.