A study to assess the impact of the cobas point-of-care RT-PCR assay (SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A/B) on patient clinical management in the emergency department of the University of California at Davis Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: Rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for reduction of transmission and clinical decision-making. Several rapid (<30 min) molecular point-of-care (POC) tests based on nucleic acid amplification exist for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B infections. METHODS: This unblinded, pre-post study enrolled consecutive patients with symptoms/signs consistent with SARS-CoV-2 infection presenting to the University of California, Davis emergency department (ED). Outcomes following implementation of the cobas® SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B test for use on the cobas Liat System (intervention: December 2020-May 2021) were compared with previous standard-of-care using centralized laboratory reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) methods (control: April 2020-October 2020). RESULTS: Electronic health records of 8879 symptomatic patient visits were analyzed, comprising 4339 and 4540 visits and 538 and 638 positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results in the control and intervention periods, respectively. Compared with the control period, turnaround time (TAT) was shorter in the intervention period (median 0.98 vs 12.30 h; p < 0.0001). ED length of stay (LOS) was generally longer in the intervention period compared with the control period, but for those SARS-CoV-2-negative who were admitted, ED LOS was shorter (median 12.53 vs 17.93 h; p < 0.0001). The rate of antibiotic prescribing was lower in the intervention than in the control period (42.86% vs 49.16%; p < 0.0001) and antiviral prescribing was higher (7.64% vs 5.49%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This real-world study confirms faster TAT with a POC RT-PCR method in an emergency care setting and highlights the importance of rapid SARS-CoV-2 detection to aid patient management and inform treatment decisions.

The Impact of Point-of-Care Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing on Prescribing Practices in Primary Care for Management of Strep A: A Retrospective Before-After Study.

Background: Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) are the standard of care (SOC) for testing in patients with suspected group A β-hemolytic Streptococcus (Strep A) infection. Due to lower sensitivity, guidelines recommend confirmatory microbiological culture following negative RADT results. This process is time-consuming, and adherence is often poor, resulting in high rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. We sought to evaluate the impact of switching from RADTs to point-of-care (POC) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing on use of antibiotics in primary care, when used as part of an antibiotic stewardship initiative. Methods: In this retrospective before-after study, electronic medical records of any patients presenting with suspected acute pharyngitis (June 2018-May 2019) across 15 outpatient primary care clinics were evaluated. Strep A was detected using the cobas Strep A assay (cobas Liat system). Results: Analysis of 10 081 eligible patient records showed that POC PCR testing resulted in a 44.1% reduction in antibiotic prescribing for patients with a negative POC PCR test result (10.1% PCR vs 18.0% RADT; P < .0001). Rates of antibiotic prescription varied across clinical sites, ranging between 10.7% and 33.8% and 12.4% and 34.4% during the use of PCR tests and RADTs, respectively. POC PCR had no impact on prescription rates in patients with positive POC test results compared to RADTs (76.2% vs 76.5%, respectively). More than 99% of antibiotics were prescribed during the initial primary care encounter. Conclusions: As part of a broader antibiotic stewardship initiative, implementation of POC PCR as SOC in outpatients with acute pharyngitis symptoms reduced the volume of inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions.

Implementation of an mHealth App to Promote Engagement During HIV Care and Viral Load Suppression in Johannesburg, South Africa (iThemba Life): Pilot Technical Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

BACKGROUND: South Africa has the largest HIV treatment program worldwide. Retention in care and medication adherence remain problematic necessitating innovative solutions for improving HIV care. The increasing availability and use of mobile technology can support positive clinical outcomes for persons living with HIV. iThemba Life is a mobile health app designed with input from South African health professionals and patients, promoting engagement with HIV care through access to medical results. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of receiving HIV viral load (VL) results through the app and compare the time to HIV VL result return for study participants before and after app use. METHODS: Using convenience sampling, adults having routine VL phlebotomy were recruited from 2 Johannesburg health facilities. After signed consent, the app was downloaded on their Android smartphones, phlebotomy was performed, and the sample barcode was scanned through their phone to link the sample and app. Participants received a notification of the result availability and logged into the app to view results, their explanation and recommended action. RESULTS: Overall, 750 people were screened to enroll 500 participants. Of 750, 113 (15.1%) failed eligibility screening. 21.5% (137/637) had smartphone technical limitations preventing enrollment. Results were released to 92.2% (461/500) of participants' phones. App technical issues and laboratory operational issues limited the number of released results. Approximately 78.1% (360/461) results were viewed in the app. Median time from notification of availability to result viewed being 15.5 hours (0.6; range 0-150 days). Turnaround time from phlebotomy to the result being received was 6 (range 1-167) days for users versus 56 days (range 10-430 days; P<.001) before app use. Overall, 4% (20/500) of participants received unsuppressed results (VL>1000 copies/mL). Turnaround time for unsuppressed results was 7 days for participants versus 37.5 days before app use (P<.001). The difference before and after app use in the suppressed and unsuppressed users for time from sample collection to result delivery was statistically significant. Of 20 participants, 12 (60%) returned for a confirmatory VL during the study period. The time from an unsuppressed VL to a confirmatory VL was 106 days for app users versus 203 days before app use (P<.001). Overall, 52.4% (262/500) of participants completed an exit survey; 23.2% (58/250) reported challenges in viewing their VL results. Moreover, 58% (35/60) reported that they overcame challenges with technical assistance from others, and 97.3% (255/262) wanted to continue using the app for VL results. CONCLUSIONS: Using iThemba Life for VL results was well-received despite limited smartphone access for some participants. App users received results 10 times sooner than before the app and 5 times sooner if their VL >1000 copies/mL. This increased notification speed led to participants wanting to continue using iThemba Life.