Clinical Impact of Rapid Point-of-Care PCR Influenza Testing in an Urgent Care Setting: a Single-Center Study

Robert C. Benirschke, Erin McElvania TeKippe, Richard B. Thomson, Karen L. Kaul, Sanchita Das

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Seasonal influenza virus causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Point-of-care (POC) testing using rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs), immunoassays that detect viral antigens, are often used for diagnosis by physician offices and urgent care centers. These tests are rapid but lack sensitivity, which is estimated to be 50 to 70%. Testing by PCR is highly sensitive and specific, but historically these assays have been performed in centralized clinical laboratories necessitating specimen transport and increasing the time to result. Recently, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived, POC PCR influenza assays have been developed with >95% sensitivity and specificity compared to centralized PCR assays. To determine the clinical impact of a POC PCR test for influenza, we compared antimicrobial prescribing patterns of one urgent care location using the Cobas LIAT Influenza A/B assay (LIAT assay; Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) to other urgent care centers in our health system using traditional RIDT, with negative specimens being reflexed to PCR. Antiviral prescribing was lower in patients with a negative LIAT PCR result (2.3%) than in patients with a negative RIDT result (25.3%; P < 0.005). Antivirals were prescribed more often in patients that tested positive by LIAT PCR (82.4%) than in those testing positive by either RIDT or reflex PCR (69.9%; P < 0.05). Antibacterial prescriptions for patients testing negative by LIAT PCR were higher (44.5%) than for those testing negative by RIDT (37.7%), although the difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, having results from a PCR POC test during the clinic visit improved antiviral prescribing practices compared to having rapid results from an RIDT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of clinical microbiology
Volume57
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Point-of-Care Systems
Ambulatory Care
Human Influenza
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Antiviral Agents
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Reflex
Physicians' Offices
Viral Antigens
Orthomyxoviridae
Immunoassay
Prescriptions

Keywords

  • clinical impact
  • influenza
  • PCR
  • point-of-care testing
  • rapid diagnosis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Cite this

Clinical Impact of Rapid Point-of-Care PCR Influenza Testing in an Urgent Care Setting : a Single-Center Study. / Benirschke, Robert C.; McElvania TeKippe, Erin; Thomson, Richard B.; Kaul, Karen L.; Das, Sanchita.

In: Journal of clinical microbiology, Vol. 57, No. 3, 01.03.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b7126e4503054a7db09708f611205e27,
title = "Clinical Impact of Rapid Point-of-Care PCR Influenza Testing in an Urgent Care Setting: a Single-Center Study",
abstract = "Seasonal influenza virus causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Point-of-care (POC) testing using rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs), immunoassays that detect viral antigens, are often used for diagnosis by physician offices and urgent care centers. These tests are rapid but lack sensitivity, which is estimated to be 50 to 70{\%}. Testing by PCR is highly sensitive and specific, but historically these assays have been performed in centralized clinical laboratories necessitating specimen transport and increasing the time to result. Recently, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived, POC PCR influenza assays have been developed with >95{\%} sensitivity and specificity compared to centralized PCR assays. To determine the clinical impact of a POC PCR test for influenza, we compared antimicrobial prescribing patterns of one urgent care location using the Cobas LIAT Influenza A/B assay (LIAT assay; Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) to other urgent care centers in our health system using traditional RIDT, with negative specimens being reflexed to PCR. Antiviral prescribing was lower in patients with a negative LIAT PCR result (2.3{\%}) than in patients with a negative RIDT result (25.3{\%}; P < 0.005). Antivirals were prescribed more often in patients that tested positive by LIAT PCR (82.4{\%}) than in those testing positive by either RIDT or reflex PCR (69.9{\%}; P < 0.05). Antibacterial prescriptions for patients testing negative by LIAT PCR were higher (44.5{\%}) than for those testing negative by RIDT (37.7{\%}), although the difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, having results from a PCR POC test during the clinic visit improved antiviral prescribing practices compared to having rapid results from an RIDT.",
keywords = "clinical impact, influenza, PCR, point-of-care testing, rapid diagnosis",
author = "Benirschke, {Robert C.} and {McElvania TeKippe}, Erin and Thomson, {Richard B.} and Kaul, {Karen L.} and Sanchita Das",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.01281-18",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "57",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical Impact of Rapid Point-of-Care PCR Influenza Testing in an Urgent Care Setting

T2 - a Single-Center Study

AU - Benirschke, Robert C.

AU - McElvania TeKippe, Erin

AU - Thomson, Richard B.

AU - Kaul, Karen L.

AU - Das, Sanchita

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Seasonal influenza virus causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Point-of-care (POC) testing using rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs), immunoassays that detect viral antigens, are often used for diagnosis by physician offices and urgent care centers. These tests are rapid but lack sensitivity, which is estimated to be 50 to 70%. Testing by PCR is highly sensitive and specific, but historically these assays have been performed in centralized clinical laboratories necessitating specimen transport and increasing the time to result. Recently, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived, POC PCR influenza assays have been developed with >95% sensitivity and specificity compared to centralized PCR assays. To determine the clinical impact of a POC PCR test for influenza, we compared antimicrobial prescribing patterns of one urgent care location using the Cobas LIAT Influenza A/B assay (LIAT assay; Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) to other urgent care centers in our health system using traditional RIDT, with negative specimens being reflexed to PCR. Antiviral prescribing was lower in patients with a negative LIAT PCR result (2.3%) than in patients with a negative RIDT result (25.3%; P < 0.005). Antivirals were prescribed more often in patients that tested positive by LIAT PCR (82.4%) than in those testing positive by either RIDT or reflex PCR (69.9%; P < 0.05). Antibacterial prescriptions for patients testing negative by LIAT PCR were higher (44.5%) than for those testing negative by RIDT (37.7%), although the difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, having results from a PCR POC test during the clinic visit improved antiviral prescribing practices compared to having rapid results from an RIDT.

AB - Seasonal influenza virus causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Point-of-care (POC) testing using rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs), immunoassays that detect viral antigens, are often used for diagnosis by physician offices and urgent care centers. These tests are rapid but lack sensitivity, which is estimated to be 50 to 70%. Testing by PCR is highly sensitive and specific, but historically these assays have been performed in centralized clinical laboratories necessitating specimen transport and increasing the time to result. Recently, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived, POC PCR influenza assays have been developed with >95% sensitivity and specificity compared to centralized PCR assays. To determine the clinical impact of a POC PCR test for influenza, we compared antimicrobial prescribing patterns of one urgent care location using the Cobas LIAT Influenza A/B assay (LIAT assay; Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) to other urgent care centers in our health system using traditional RIDT, with negative specimens being reflexed to PCR. Antiviral prescribing was lower in patients with a negative LIAT PCR result (2.3%) than in patients with a negative RIDT result (25.3%; P < 0.005). Antivirals were prescribed more often in patients that tested positive by LIAT PCR (82.4%) than in those testing positive by either RIDT or reflex PCR (69.9%; P < 0.05). Antibacterial prescriptions for patients testing negative by LIAT PCR were higher (44.5%) than for those testing negative by RIDT (37.7%), although the difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, having results from a PCR POC test during the clinic visit improved antiviral prescribing practices compared to having rapid results from an RIDT.

KW - clinical impact

KW - influenza

KW - PCR

KW - point-of-care testing

KW - rapid diagnosis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062258655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062258655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.01281-18

DO - 10.1128/JCM.01281-18

M3 - Article

C2 - 30602445

AN - SCOPUS:85062258655

VL - 57

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 3

ER -