+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Point of Care Testing for Infectious Disease in Europe: A Scoping Review and Survey Study


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background: Point of care testing (POCT) for infectious diseases is testing conducted near the patient. It allows clinicians to offer the most appropriate treatment more quickly. As POCT devices have increased in accuracy and become more cost-effective, their use has grown, but a systematic assessment of their use for clinical and public health management of infectious diseases in EU/EEA countries has not been previously undertaken.

          Methods: A scoping review of the literature on POCT in EU/ EEA countries as at November 2019, and a survey of key stakeholders.

          Results: 350 relevant articles were identified and 54 survey responses from 26 EU/EEA countries were analysed. POCT is available for a range of infectious diseases and in all countries responding to the survey (for at least one disease). POCT is commonly available for influenza, HIV/AIDS, Legionnaires' disease and malaria, where it is used in at least half of EU/EEA countries. While POCT has the potential to support many improvements to clinical care of infectious diseases (e.g., faster diagnosis, more appropriate use of antimicrobials), the results suggest POCT is infrequently used to support public health functions (e.g., disease surveillance and reporting).

          Conclusion: Although POCT is in use to some extent in all EU/EEA countries, the full benefits of POCT in wider public health functions have yet to be realised. Further research on barriers and facilitators to implementation is warranted.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

            Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement.

              To develop an evidence-based guideline for Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) for systematic reviews (SRs), health technology assessments, and other evidence syntheses.

                Author and article information

                Front Public Health
                Front Public Health
                Front. Public Health
                Frontiers in Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                20 October 2021
                : 9
                : 722943
                [1] 1RAND Europe , Cambridge, United Kingdom
                [2] 2European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control , Stockholm, Sweden
                Author notes

                Edited by: Jian Wu, Zhejiang University, China

                Reviewed by: Guanghua Zhai, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, China; Huang Biao, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, China; Yuzhu Dai, 903rd Hospital of PLA, China

                *Correspondence: Lucy Hocking lhocking@ 123456randeurope.org

                This article was submitted to Infectious Diseases - Surveillance, Prevention and Treatment, a section of the journal Frontiers in Public Health

                Copyright © 2021 Hocking, George, Broberg, Struelens, Leitmeyer, Deshpande, Parkinson, Francombe, Morley and de Carvalho Gomes.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                : 09 June 2021
                : 22 September 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 21, Pages: 9, Words: 5179
                Funded by: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, doi 10.13039/501100000805;
                Public Health
                Brief Research Report

                near patient,diagnostics,infectious diseases,europe,point of care (poc) diagnosis,point of care (poc),near patient testing


                Comment on this article