ArticleSexual health2018
Patterns of point-of-care test use among obstetricians and gynaecologists in the US.
Article in Sexual health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overcoming Challenges with the Adoption of Point-of-Care Testing: From Technology Push and Clinical Needs to Value Propositions.Point of care · 2020Article
- Point-by-Point Progress: Gonorrhea Point of Care Tests.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for reproductive health conditions have existed for decades. Newer POCTs for syphilis, HIV and trichomonas are currently available and easy to use. We surveyed practicing obstetricians and gynaecologists to determine current POCT use and perceived obstacles to use.
methodsBetween June and August 2016, 1000 members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists were randomly selected and invited to complete a Qualtrics (222 West river Park Drive, Provo, Utah 84604, USA) survey; 600 of these were members of the Collaborative Ambulatory Research Network. Respondents who completed at least 60% of the survey were included in the analysis.
resultsOf the 1000 selected members, 749 had valid emails and 288 (38%) of these participated in and completed the survey. Of the respondents, 70% were male with a mean of 18 years in practice. Detection of sexually transmissible infections (STIs) once or twice a week was reported by 30%, whereas 45% reported detecting STIs once or twice a month. POCTs used included pregnancy tests (83%), urine dipstick (83%), wet mount tests (79%) and the vagina pH test (54.8%). Few used Gram stain (5%) and stat rapid plasma regain tests (4%). Relatively newer US Food and Drug Administration-approved POCTs were used less frequently, with 25% of respondents reporting using the Affirm VPIII (Becton, Dickinson and Company, 1 Becton Drive, Franklin Lakes, NJ 07471, USA) test use and only 10% using a rapid HIV test. The most common perceived barriers to testing were the amount of reimbursement received for performing the test (61.9%) and the payment coverage from the patient (61.3%).
conclusionsUS obstetricians and gynaecologists rely on laboratory test results and traditional POCTs to diagnosis STIs. Future development and marketing of POCTs should consider not only ease and time of test performance, but also the cost of the tests to the practice and the patient, as well as reimbursement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.