Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33153519›Full record

ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2020

The experience of point-of-care testing for influenza in Scotland in 2017/18 and 2018/19 - no gain without pain.

Elizabeth M Dickson, Diogo Fp Marques, Sandra Currie, Annette Little, Kirsty Mangin, Michael Coyne, Arlene Reynolds, Jim McMenamin, David Yirrell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The cat is out of the bag - point-of-care testing (POCT) is here to stay.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020
    Article
  4. Do point-of-care tests (POCTs) offer a new paradigm for the management of patients with influenza?Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020
    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

9 authors.

Elizabeth M DicksonEuropean Public Health Microbiology Training Programme (EUPHEM), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden.
Diogo Fp MarquesHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Sandra CurrieHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Annette LittleHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Kirsty ManginHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Michael CoyneHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Arlene ReynoldsHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Jim McMenaminHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
David YirrellHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundDuring the 2017/18 and 2018/19 influenza seasons, molecular amplification-based point-of-care tests (mPOCT) were introduced in Scotland to aid triaging respiratory patients for hospital admission, yet communication of results to national surveillance was unaccounted for.AimThis retrospective study aims to describe steps taken to capture mPOCT data and assess impact on influenza surveillance.MethodsQuestionnaires determined mPOCT usage in 2017/18 and 2018/19. Searches of the Electronic Communication of Surveillance in Scotland (ECOSS) database were performed and compared with information stored in laboratory information management systems. Effect of incomplete data on surveillance was determined by comparing routine against enhanced data and assessing changes in influenza activity levels determined by the moving epidemic method.ResultsThe number of areas employing mPOCT increased over the two seasons (6/14 in 2017/18 and 8/14 in 2018/19). Analysis of a small number of areas (n = 3) showed capture of positive mPOCT results in ECOSS improved between seasons and remained high (> 94%). However, capture of negative results was incomplete. Despite small discrepancies in weekly activity assessments, routine data were able to identify trend, start, peak and end of both influenza seasons.ConclusionThis study has shown an improvement in capture of data from influenza mPOCT and has highlighted issues that need to be addressed for results to be accurately captured in national surveillance. With the clear benefit to patient management we suggest careful consideration should be given to the connectivity aspects of the technology in order to ensure minimal impact on national surveillance.

Indexed as

Influenza, HumanPoint-of-Care TestingPublic Health SurveillanceHumansRetrospective StudiesScotlandSeasonsInfluenzanational surveillancepatient managementpoint-of-care testing

Identifiers

PMID33153519
PMCPMC7645975

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.