Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
JACCP Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy ; 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2316212

ABSTRACT

Community pharmacists' roles have expanded in recent years to include offering test and treat programs where they perform testing on Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-waived point-of-care testing (POCT) devices to diagnose specific acute infectious conditions, such as influenza and group A streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis, and then potentially prescribe and dispense appropriate antimicrobials. Availability of these services in pharmacies has several benefits, including increased access to care, decreased overutilization of other health care services, and decreased antimicrobial resistance. States have different requirements for collaborative practice agreements and reimbursement for these clinical services in community pharmacies. Several studies have looked at outcomes related to community pharmacies implementing test and treat programs for influenza and/or GAS. Other studies looked at outcomes related to implementing testing for SARS-CoV-2 and referring for treatment. Most studies described successful implementation and barriers to integration of these programs into pharmacy workflow. Some studies showed that patients want these services to be offered in community pharmacies and are willing to pay for the services. Data show that these services are cost effective compared to physician provider-based treatment. Newer CLIA-waived POCT technology may increase implementation of these services, but studies are needed to evaluate their utility in community pharmacies. Pharmacy schools should implement widespread training on these devices, and research should continue in this area to test the use of newer technology (i.e., multiplexed devices) and their economic impact.Copyright © 2023 Pharmacotherapy Publications, Inc.

2.
SoftwareX ; 15: 100710, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1281569

ABSTRACT

Lateral flow Point-Of-Care Tests (POCTs) are a valuable tool for rapidly detecting pathogens and the associated immune response in humans and animals. In the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, they offer rapid on-site diagnostics and can relieve centralized laboratory testing sites, thus freeing resources that can be focused on especially vulnerable groups. However, visual interpretation of the POCT test lines is subjective, error prone and only qualitative. Here we present pyPOCQuant, an open-source tool implemented in Python 3 that can robustly and reproducibly analyze POCTs from digital images and return an unbiased and quantitative measurement of the POCT test lines.

3.
J Clin Virol ; 137: 104789, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1126918

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen tests (RATs) may be included in national strategies for handling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, as they provide test results rapidly, are easily performed outside laboratories, and enable immediate contract tracing. However, before implementation further clinical evaluation of test sensitivity is warranted. OBJECTIVES: To examine the performance of Abbott's Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device for SARS-CoV-2 testing in a low to medium prevalence setting in Norway. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study comparing the results of the Panbio RAT with PCR in 4857 parallel samples collected at a SARS-CoV-2 test station in Oslo, and from COVID-19 outbreaks in six Norwegian municipalities. RESULTS: A total of 4857 cases were included in the study; 3991 and 866 cases from the test station and the outbreak municipalities, respectively. The prevalence at the test station in Oslo was 6.3 %, and the overall sensitivity of the RAT was 74 %. Increased sensitivity was observed in patients who experienced symptoms (79 %) and when considering samples with viral loads above estimated level of infectivity (84 %), while it was lower in asymptomatic persons (55 %). In the outbreak municipalities, the overall prevalence was 6.9 %, and the total sensitivity of the RAT was 70 %. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the test correctly identified most infectious individuals. Nevertheless, the sensitivity is considerably lower than for PCR, and it is important that the limitations of the test are kept in mind in the follow-up of tested individuals.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Testing/methods , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Humans , Norway/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Viral Load
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL