Concordance of three point of care testing devices with clinical chemistry laboratory standard assays and patient-reported outcomes of blood sampling methods.


Journal

BMC medical informatics and decision making
ISSN: 1472-6947
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088682

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 09 2022
Historique:
received: 17 05 2021
accepted: 16 09 2022
entrez: 22 9 2022
pubmed: 23 9 2022
medline: 28 9 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Point of care testing (POCT) devices have been developed to facilitate immediate results with the potential to aid screening for new disease and enable patients to self-monitor their disease. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the major cause of mortality globally and are increasing in prevalence as the population ages. Allied health care professionals (AHPs) are skilled in undertaking risk assessment and delivering preventative advice, providing opportunities to access large proportions of the population who may not visit their doctor, within non-traditional community settings. There is evidence of high levels of support from public, patients and health professionals for engaging AHPs in risk-targeted early case detection of certain NCDs. Thus, POCT devices offer a potential alternative to traditional venous blood collection, as novel care pathways for increasing early case detection and access to preventative care. The objectives of this study were to: (i) determine the concordance of the specific POCT devices with laboratory-based standard assays employed within clinical biochemistry laboratories. (ii) compare the sampling experience of both methods via patient-reported experiences. A prospective, two-centre study was undertaken involving 158 participants who provided informed consent. Venous blood was collected for traditional assays of HbA1c, creatinine/ estimated Glomerular-Filtration-Rate (eGFR) and vitamin-D. Capillary blood was collected by finger prick test and also assayed for the same biochemical indices (Nova StatSensor (creatinine/eGFR); Siemens DCA-Vantage (HbA1C); CityAssays (vitamin-D)). All users were provided with device training. Participants reported any discomfort experienced by each simultaneously applied method (randomised in order) via a 100 mm Visual-Analogue-Scale. Results for each POCT device and the laboratory standard were analysed by Bland-Altman plots to determine assay concordance. POCT devices demonstrated good concordance with laboratory testing, with at least 95% of all samples being within two standard deviations, for each of the devices tested. The majority of participants reported less discomfort with POCT than venepuncture, with the average reported discomfort being 17/100 mm less for POCT compared to venous blood sample collection on the visual analogue scale. The POCT devices demonstrated acceptable concordance with laboratory-based assays, and patients reported lower levels of discomfort compared to traditional means of blood collection. This study demonstrates the potential of using these devices as acceptable methods for opportunistic testing of "at-risk" individuals within non-traditional community care settings.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Point of care testing (POCT) devices have been developed to facilitate immediate results with the potential to aid screening for new disease and enable patients to self-monitor their disease. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the major cause of mortality globally and are increasing in prevalence as the population ages. Allied health care professionals (AHPs) are skilled in undertaking risk assessment and delivering preventative advice, providing opportunities to access large proportions of the population who may not visit their doctor, within non-traditional community settings. There is evidence of high levels of support from public, patients and health professionals for engaging AHPs in risk-targeted early case detection of certain NCDs. Thus, POCT devices offer a potential alternative to traditional venous blood collection, as novel care pathways for increasing early case detection and access to preventative care. The objectives of this study were to: (i) determine the concordance of the specific POCT devices with laboratory-based standard assays employed within clinical biochemistry laboratories. (ii) compare the sampling experience of both methods via patient-reported experiences.
METHODS
A prospective, two-centre study was undertaken involving 158 participants who provided informed consent. Venous blood was collected for traditional assays of HbA1c, creatinine/ estimated Glomerular-Filtration-Rate (eGFR) and vitamin-D. Capillary blood was collected by finger prick test and also assayed for the same biochemical indices (Nova StatSensor (creatinine/eGFR); Siemens DCA-Vantage (HbA1C); CityAssays (vitamin-D)). All users were provided with device training. Participants reported any discomfort experienced by each simultaneously applied method (randomised in order) via a 100 mm Visual-Analogue-Scale.
RESULTS
Results for each POCT device and the laboratory standard were analysed by Bland-Altman plots to determine assay concordance. POCT devices demonstrated good concordance with laboratory testing, with at least 95% of all samples being within two standard deviations, for each of the devices tested. The majority of participants reported less discomfort with POCT than venepuncture, with the average reported discomfort being 17/100 mm less for POCT compared to venous blood sample collection on the visual analogue scale.
CONCLUSIONS
The POCT devices demonstrated acceptable concordance with laboratory-based assays, and patients reported lower levels of discomfort compared to traditional means of blood collection. This study demonstrates the potential of using these devices as acceptable methods for opportunistic testing of "at-risk" individuals within non-traditional community care settings.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36138408
doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-01999-z
pii: 10.1186/s12911-022-01999-z
pmc: PMC9493167
doi:

Substances chimiques

Glycated Hemoglobin A 0
Vitamins 0
Creatinine AYI8EX34EU

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

248

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Mar;42(3):228-35
pubmed: 25581313
Int J Dent Hyg. 2016 May;14(2):98-107
pubmed: 25809551
Diabet Med. 2013 Feb;30(2):239-45
pubmed: 22946629
Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
pubmed: 10501650
Clin Chem. 2014 Aug;60(8):1062-72
pubmed: 24865164
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1532632
pubmed: 30422084
Ann Epidemiol. 2020 Aug;48:23-29.e4
pubmed: 32648546
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 Feb 1;55(2):167-180
pubmed: 27658148
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Jun;17(5):1383-8
pubmed: 22903529
BMJ Open. 2018 Nov 3;8(11):e024503
pubmed: 30391921
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011 Nov;135(11):1405-14
pubmed: 22032566
Emerg Radiol. 2021 Feb;28(1):77-82
pubmed: 32725604
BMJ Open. 2014 Aug 08;4(8):e005611
pubmed: 25107438
J Am Dent Assoc. 2014 Jan;145(1):57-64
pubmed: 24379330
J Public Health Dent. 2015 Summer;75(3):175-82
pubmed: 25662777
Diabet Med. 2007 Jul;24(7):792-5
pubmed: 17451419
Clin Biochem. 2000 Aug;33(6):427-40
pubmed: 11074234
Ann Pharmacother. 2005 Jun;39(6):1024-8
pubmed: 15840733
BMJ. 2013 Mar 15;346:f1630
pubmed: 23502707
J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Jan;141(1):52-62
pubmed: 20045822
Anaesthesia. 1976 Nov;31(9):1191-8
pubmed: 1015603
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2000 Jan;5(1):37-41
pubmed: 10787586
Br J Nutr. 2016 Jan 28;115(2):202-11
pubmed: 26548417
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2014;158:A8210
pubmed: 25515388
J Dent Res. 2013 Oct;92(10):888-92
pubmed: 23979781
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 17;10(4):e0122433
pubmed: 25886375
Br J Haematol. 2008 Sep;142(6):904-15
pubmed: 18671699
Diabet Med. 2020 Sep;37(9):1443-1453
pubmed: 32426909
BMC Public Health. 2020 Oct 20;20(1):1576
pubmed: 33081745

Auteurs

Z Yonel (Z)

The Periodontal Research Group, School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, 5 Mill Pool Way, Birmingham, B5 7EG, UK. z.yonel@bham.ac.uk.

K Kuningas (K)

Department of Renal Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.

P Sharma (P)

The Periodontal Research Group, School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, 5 Mill Pool Way, Birmingham, B5 7EG, UK.

M Dutton (M)

Department of Renal Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.

Z Jalal (Z)

School of Pharmacy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

P Cockwell (P)

Department of Renal Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.

J Webber (J)

Diabetes Unit, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.

P Narendran (P)

Diabetes Unit, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.

T Dietrich (T)

The Periodontal Research Group, School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, 5 Mill Pool Way, Birmingham, B5 7EG, UK.

I L C Chapple (ILC)

The Periodontal Research Group, School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, 5 Mill Pool Way, Birmingham, B5 7EG, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH