Matthes Anni, Bleidorn Jutta, Markwart Robby
Jena University Hospital, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Germany; InfectoGnostics Research Campus Jena, Jena, Germany.
Jena University Hospital, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Germany.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2022 Nov;174:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.06.002. Epub 2022 Aug 30.
The fast turnaround time and user-friendliness of point-of-care tests (POCTs) offer a great potential to improve outpatient health care where clinical decisions have to be made during the physician-patient encounter and time resources are limited. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the extent and nature as well as gaps in German research activities on POCT in outpatient care. In addition, we define research endpoints that should be addressed in the comprehensive evaluation of POCTs targeted for outpatient care.
We performed a scoping review with a systematic literature search in Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Google Scholar for German publications on POCT with relevance to German outpatient care published from January 2005 to November 2020.
Our literature search identified 2,200 unique records. After literature selection 117 articles were included in this scoping review. Just over half of the articles (67/117, 57.3%) were primary research studies with original data, while one third of all the studies (33.3%) were secondary research articles (e.g., review articles). The remaining articles were clinical recommendations / position papers (7/117, 6.0%) and other types of articles (3.4%). The majority of articles focused on POCT use in infectious diseases (44/117, 37.6%), diabetic syndromes (15.4%), cardiac disease (12.0%) or coagulopathies and thrombosis (10.3%), while the remaining articles did not specify the disease (13.7%) or investigated other diseases (11.1%). Similar to international studies, most primary research studies investigated the diagnostic performance of POCT (e.g., sensitivity, specificity). Evidence beyond diagnostic accuracy remains scarce, such as the impact on therapeutic decisions and practice routines, clinical effectiveness, and user perspectives. In line with this, interventional studies (such as RCTs) on the effectiveness of POCT use in German outpatient care are limited. We define six endpoint domains that should be addressed in the evaluation of POCTs targeted for outpatient care: (i) diagnostic performance, (ii) clinical performance, (iii) time and costs, (iv) impact on clinical routines / processes, (v) perspectives of medical professionals and patients, and (vi) broader aspects.
There is considerable research activity on POCTs targeted for use in outpatient care in Germany. Data on their potential benefits beyond diagnostic accuracy is often lacking and should be addressed in future POCT research studies.
即时检验(POCT)周转时间短且用户友好,在门诊医疗中具有巨大潜力,因为在医患诊疗过程中需要做出临床决策且时间资源有限。本范围综述的目的是描述德国门诊医疗中POCT研究活动的范围、性质以及差距。此外,我们定义了在针对门诊医疗的POCT综合评估中应涉及的研究终点。
我们进行了一项范围综述,在Medline(通过PubMed)、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane图书馆和谷歌学术中对2005年1月至2020年11月发表的与德国门诊医疗相关的德语POCT出版物进行系统文献检索。
我们的文献检索共识别出2200条独特记录。经过文献筛选,117篇文章被纳入本范围综述。略多于一半的文章(67/117,57.3%)是有原始数据的原发性研究,而所有研究的三分之一(33.3%)是继发性研究文章(如综述文章)。其余文章为临床推荐/立场文件(7/117,6.0%)和其他类型文章(3.4%)。大多数文章聚焦于POCT在传染病(44/117,37.6%)、糖尿病综合征(15.4%)、心脏病(12.0%)或凝血障碍与血栓形成(10.3%)中的应用,而其余文章未明确疾病(13.7%)或研究其他疾病(11.1%)。与国际研究类似,大多数原发性研究调查了POCT的诊断性能(如敏感性、特异性)。除诊断准确性之外的证据仍然匮乏,如对治疗决策和实践流程的影响、临床有效性以及用户观点。与此一致的是,关于POCT在德国门诊医疗中有效性的干预性研究(如随机对照试验)有限。我们定义了六个终点领域,在针对门诊医疗的POCT评估中应涉及:(i)诊断性能,(ii)临床性能,(iii)时间和成本,(iv)对临床常规/流程的影响,(v)医疗专业人员和患者的观点,以及(vi)更广泛的方面。
德国针对门诊医疗使用的POCT有大量研究活动。关于其除诊断准确性之外潜在益处的数据往往缺乏,应在未来的POCT研究中加以探讨。