ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2020
Use of Routine Complete Blood Count Results to Rule Out Anaplasmosis Without the Need for Specific Diagnostic Testing.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Decision Support Trees Can Help Optimize Utilization of Anaplasma phagocytophilum Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnaplasmosis presents with fever, headache, and laboratory abnormalities including leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the preferred diagnostic but is overutilized. We determined if routine laboratory tests could exclude anaplasmosis, improving PCR utilization.
methodsAnaplasma PCR results from a 3-year period, with associated complete blood count (CBC) and liver function test results, were retrospectively reviewed. PCR rejection criteria, based on white blood cell (WBC) and platelet (PLT) counts, were developed and prospectively applied in a mock stewardship program. If rejection criteria were met, a committee mock-refused PCR unless the patient was clinically unstable or immunocompromised.
resultsWBC and PLT counts were the most actionable routine tests for excluding anaplasmosis. Retrospective review demonstrated that rejection criteria of WBC ≥11 000 cells/µL or PLT ≥300 000 cells/µL would have led to PCR refusal in 428 of 1685 true-negative cases (25%) and 3 of 66 true-positive cases (5%) involving clinically unstable or immunocompromised patients. In the prospective phase, 155 of 663 PCR requests (23%) met rejection criteria and were reviewed by committee, which endorsed refusal in 110 of 155 cases (71%) and approval in 45 (29%), based on clinical criteria. PCR was negative in all 45 committee-approved cases. Only 1 of 110 mock-refused requests yielded a positive PCR result; this patient was already receiving doxycycline at the time of testing.
conclusionsA CBC-based stewardship algorithm would reduce unnecessary Anaplasma PCR testing, without missing active cases. Although the prospectively evaluated screening approach involved medical record review, this was unnecessary to prevent errors and could be replaced by a rejection comment specifying clinical situations that might warrant overriding the algorithm.
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.