ArticleBMJ open2026
Healthcare professionals' perspectives on point-of-care testing quality and access in Australian healthcare services: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences with point-of-care testing (PoCT) implementation within Australia's healthcare system and identify potential strategies for effective governance and improvements to regulation and guidelines that facilitate coordinated integration of quality PoCT into healthcare systems.
designA descriptive qualitative study with thematic analysis with codes derived inductively from the transcriptions and a structured framework analysis using the six building blocks of the WHO Health Systems Framework exploring barriers and enablers to PoCT implementation. SETTINGS: Healthcare settings in Australia.
participantsHealthcare workers with patient care responsibilities and healthcare administrators with oversight or regulatory responsibility for a service. 18 participants were interviewed with four from hospitals, four from primary care, three from community care, three from pathology laboratories, two from emergency care and two from pharmacy settings.
resultsHealthcare professionals' perspectives on PoCT implementation were grouped into three main themes: (1) community-centric pathology testing, (2) connectivity and continuity of care and (3) quality and governance. Participants identified insufficient health system financing and health information systems as significant barriers to PoCT implementation. Improved practical guidance for workforce training and health service delivery to interpret the current regulation outside of laboratory settings was viewed as a potential enabler to establishing PoCT within healthcare services.
conclusionParticipants reflected that Australia has several examples of successful PoCT programmes providing patient-centred pathology to improve healthcare equity. However, the lack of information systems, funding, workforce training and diagnostic strategies prohibits the implementation of PoCT at-scale. It was recommended that adequately financing PoCT to encompass costs for testing, quality management and workforce training would incentivise services to obtain accreditation and ensure quality healthcare delivery. Despite the potential of PoCT to improve equitable healthcare access and patient outcomes, health system strengthening is required to integrate PoCT effectively across Australian healthcare services.
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.