Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27224025›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Performance Evaluation of the Becton Dickinson FACSPresto™ Near-Patient CD4 Instrument in a Laboratory and Typical Field Clinic Setting in South Africa.

Lindi-Marie Coetzee, Keshendree Moodley, Deborah Kim Glencross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Performance Evaluation of BD FACSPrestoDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lindi-Marie CoetzeeNational Health Laboratory Service of South Africa (NHLS), Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, CD4 Laboratory, Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Keshendree MoodleyDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Haematology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, 7 York Road, Parktown, 2198, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Deborah Kim GlencrossNational Health Laboratory Service of South Africa (NHLS), Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, CD4 Laboratory, Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe BD-FACSPresto™ CD4 is a new, point-of-care (POC) instrument utilising finger-stick capillary blood sampling. This study evaluated its performance against predicate CD4 testing in South Africa.

methodsPhase-I testing: HIV+ patient samples (n = 214) were analysed on the Presto™ under ideal laboratory conditions using venous blood. During Phase-II, 135 patients were capillary-bled for CD4 testing on FACSPresto™, performed according to manufacturer instruction. Comparative statistical analyses against predicate PLG/CD4 method and industry standards were done using GraphPad Prism 6. It included Bland-Altman with 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and percentage similarity with coefficient of variation (%CV) analyses for absolute CD4 count (cells/μl) and CD4 percentage of lymphocytes (CD4%).

resultsIn Phase-I, 179/217 samples yielded reportable results with Presto™ using venous blood filled cartridges. Compared to predicate, a mean bias of 40.4±45.8 (LOA of -49.2 to 130.2) and %similarity (%CV) of 106.1%±7.75 (7.3%) was noted for CD4 absolute counts. In Phase-2 field study, 118/135 capillary-bled Presto™ samples resulted CD4 parameters. Compared to predicate, a mean bias of 50.2±92.8 (LOA of -131.7 to 232) with %similarity (%CV) 105%±10.8 (10.3%), and 2.87±2.7 (LOA of -8.2 to 2.5) with similarity of 94.7±6.5% (6.83%) noted for absolute CD4 and CD4% respectively. No significant clinical differences were indicated for either parameter using two sampling methods.

conclusionThe Presto™ produced remarkable precision to predicate methods, irrespective of venous or capillary blood sampling. A consistent, clinically insignificant over-estimation (5-7%) of counts against PLG/CD4 and equivalency to FACSCount™ was noted. Further field studies are awaited to confirm longer-term use.

Indexed as

AdultCD4 Lymphocyte CountFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPoint-of-Care SystemsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID27224025
PMCPMC4880207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.