ArticlePloS one2020
Impact of the BioFire FilmArray gastrointestinal panel on patient care and infection control.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of a Rapid Multiplex Gastrointestinal Panel with Standard Laboratory Testing in the Management of Children with Hematochezia in a Pediatric Emergency Department: Randomized Controlled Trial.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of false positive enteric viruses results from the BIOFIRE® FILMARRAY® gastrointestinal PCR panel.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2026Article
- Impact of the BioFireBMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Trends of nucleic acid - based point-of-care diagnostics for infectious diseases.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- Syndromic Diagnostics for Travelers' Diarrhea: Near-Patient Field-Expedient Testing in Resource-Limited Settings.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Impact of FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel Compared to Standard-of-Care Diagnostic Tests in Clinical Practice of Acute Gastroenteritis in an HIV Reference Center with Limited Resources.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Decoding the Unexpected: How Cell-Free DNA Sequencing Unveiled an Elusive Tularemia Case.The Permanente journal · 2025Article
- PCR-Based Versus Conventional Stool Testing in Hospitalized Patients with Diarrhea: Diagnostic Yield, Clinical Impact, and Stewardship Implications.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Associations Between BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel Results and Clinical Outcomes in Infectious Gastroenteritis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Panels for Gastrointestinal Infections: Current Evidence, Regulatory Hurdles, and the Way Forward.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Multicenter evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx Gastrointestinal Panel 2, a multiplex PCR platform for the diagnosis of acute gastroenteritis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Acute infectious gastroenteritis in childhood: the role of rapid multiplex molecular syndromic panels in diagnosis and clinical management.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2025Review
- Adaptation and validation of a gastrointestinal panel to detect diarrheal virus pathogens on a high-throughput qPCR system.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2025Article
- Clinical Impact of Stool Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Testing in Hospitalized Patients with Acute Diarrhea: A Retrospective Observational Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Clinical and microbiological profile of patients with diarrhea evaluated using the gastrointestinal panel in a high-complexity center.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Prospective evaluation of different faecal preservation media for travellers' diarrhoea diagnostic application with multiplex PCR BioFire FilmArray in resource-limited settings.Journal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial changes made for suspected infectious diarrhea after positive gastrointestinal pathogen panel result.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- A multicenter evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx meningitis-encephalitis syndromic test kit as compared to the conventional diagnostic microbiology workflow.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- A Systematic Literature Review to Identify Diagnostic Gaps in Managing Immunocompromised Patients With Cancer and Suspected Infection.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Review
- Rapid diagnostics to enhance therapy selection for the treatment of bacterial infections.Current pharmacology reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesConventional routine PCR testing for gastrointestinal infections is generally based on pathogen related panels specifically requested by clinicians and can be erroneous and time consuming. The BioFire FilmArray gastrointestinal (GI) panel combines 22 pathogens into a single cartridge-based test on a random-access system, thereby reducing the turnaround time to less than 2 hours. We described the clinical impact of implementing the BioFire FilmArray on patients with gastroenteritis in our hospital.
methodsPatients attending a Dutch tertiary care center (Radboud University Medical Center), from whom stool samples were obtained, were eligible for inclusion. The clinicians selected one or a combination of different routinely performed PCR panels (bacterial panel, viral panel, clostridium testing, and three parasitic panels) based on clinical history and symptoms. All samples were in parallel tested with the FilmArray. We retrospectively collected patient data regarding infection control and patient management to assess the potential impact of implementing the FilmArray.
resultsIn total 182 patients were included. Routine PCR detected one or more pathogens in 52 (28.6%) patients compared to 72 (39.6%) using the FilmArray. Turnaround time (including transport) decreased from median 53 hours for the routine PCR to 16 hours for the FilmArray. Twenty-six patients could have been removed from isolation 29 hours sooner, 3.6 antibiotic days could have been saved and in five patients additional imaging testing (including colonoscopies) could have been prevented.
conclusionThe theoretical implementation of the BioFire FilmArray GI panel in patients with clinical suspicion of gastroenteritis resulted in a significant better patient management.
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.