Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35922372›Full record

ArticleThe clinical respiratory journal2022

Optimisation of COVID-19 diagnostic pathways in acute hospital admissions to prevent nosocomial transmission.

Robert Livingstone, Alexander Woodhead, Megha Bhandari, James Dias, Trevor Smith, Tom Havelock, Matthew Stammers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The clinical respiratory journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. 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

7 authors.

Robert LivingstoneUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Alexander WoodheadUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Megha BhandariUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
James DiasUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Trevor SmithUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Tom HavelockUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Matthew StammersUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn the management of acute hospital admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic, safe patient cohorting depends on robust admission diagnostic strategies. It is essential that screening strategies are sensitive and rapid, to prevent nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 and maintain patient flow.

methodsWe retrospectively identified all COVID-19 positive and suspected cases at our institution screened by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between 4 April and 28 June 2020. Using RT-PCR positivity within 7 days as our reference standard, we assessed sensitivity and net-benefit of three admission screening strategies: single admission RT-PCR, composite admission RT-PCR and CXR and repeat RT-PCR with 48 h.

resultsRT-PCR single-test sensitivity was 91.5% (87.8%-94.4%) versus 97.7% (95.4%-99.1%) (p = 0.025) for RT-PCR/CXR composite testing and 95.1% (92.1%-97.2%) (p = 0.03) for repeated RT-PCR. Net-benefit was 0.83 for single RT-PCR versus 0.89 for RT-PCR/CXR and 0.87 for repeated RT-PCR at 0.02% threshold probability.

conclusionThe RT-PCR/CXR composite testing strategy was highly sensitive when screening patients at the point of hospital admission. Real-world sensitivity of this approach was comparable to repeat RT-PCR testing within 48 h; however, faster facilitating improved patient flow.

Indexed as

COVID-19Cross InfectionCOVID-19 TestingHospitalsHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and Specificitychest X-rayCOVID-19 testingcross infectionreverse transcription polymerase chain reaction

Identifiers

PMID35922372
PMCPMC9436905

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.