Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32172369›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2020

Performance and ease of use of a molecular point-of-care test for influenza A/B and RSV in patients presenting to primary care.

Jan Y Verbakel, Veerle Matheeussen, Katherine Loens, Mandy Kuijstermans, Herman Goossens, Margareta Ieven, Christopher C Butler

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

7 authors.

Jan Y VerbakelNIHR Community Healthcare MIC, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Road, Oxford, Oxfordshire, OX26GG, UK. jan.verbakel@phc.ox.ac.uk.
Veerle MatheeussenLaboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Katherine LoensLaboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Mandy KuijstermansLaboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Herman GoossensLaboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Margareta IevenLaboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Christopher C ButlerNIHR Community Healthcare MIC, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Road, Oxford, Oxfordshire, OX26GG, UK.

Funding

Roche Molecular Diagnostics LIAT-IIS-007Seventh Framework Programme HEALTH-F3-2013-602525
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Annual influenza epidemics cause substantial morbidity and mortality, and the majority of patients with influenza-like illness present to primary care. Point-of-care influenza tests could support treatment decisions. It is critical to establish analytic performance of these platforms in real-life patient samples before uptake can be considered. We aimed to assess the analytical performance and ease of use of the cobas® Liat® PCR POCT in detecting influenza A/B and RSV in samples collected from patients with influenza-like illness in primary care. Sensitivity and specificity of the cobas® Liat® POCT are calculated in comparison with a commercial laboratory-based PCR test (Fast-Track Respiratory Pathogens 21 Plus kit (Fast-Track Diagnostics)). Samples with discordant results were analysed additionally by the RespiFinder 2Smart (PathoFinder) using an Extended Gold Standard (EGS). Acceptability was scored on a five-point Likert scale as well as a failure mode analysis of the cobas® Liat® POCT was performed. Nasal and oropharyngeal swabs were obtained from 140 children and nasopharyngeal swabs from 604 adults (744 patients). The cobas® Liat® POCT had a sensitivity and specificity of 100% (95% CI 99-100%) and 98.1% (95%CI 96.3-99%) for influenza A, 100% (95% CI 97.7-100%) and 99.7% (95%CI 98.7-99.9%) for influenza B and 100% (95% CI 87.1-100%) and 99.4% (95%CI 98.6-99.8%) for RSV, respectively. According to trained lab technicians, the cobas® Liat® POCT was considered easy-to-use, with a fast turn-around-time. Cobas® Liat® POCT is a promising decentralised test platform for influenza A/B and RSV in primary care as it provides fairly rapid results with excellent analytic performance. Point-of-care influenza tests could support treatment decisions in primary care. Cobas® Liat® POCT is a promising decentralised test platform for influenza A/B and RSV in primary care as it provides fairly rapid results with excellent analytic performance.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfluenza A virusInfluenza B virusInfluenza, HumanMaleMiddle AgedPolymerase Chain ReactionEase-of-useInfluenzaPCRPoint-of-carePrimary care

Identifiers

PMID32172369
PMCPMC7343728

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.