Point-of-care testing for coagulation function: CoaguChek® XS System versus standard laboratory testing in pediatric patients with normal and abnormal coagulation function

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-350
Author(s):  
Hiromi Kako ◽  
Vidya T. Raman ◽  
Dmitry Tumin ◽  
Julie Rice ◽  
Joseph D. Tobias
Author(s):  
Dana Teodorescu ◽  
Caroline Larkin

This chapter reviews the causes and outlines an approach to the management of coagulopathy following cardiac surgery. Bleeding after cardiac surgery is common and expected up to a rate of 2 mL/kg/h for the first 6 hours. A more significant hemorrhage needs to be investigated and treated. Causes are often multifactorial. It is imperative that surgical causes be excluded early concomitant to providing resuscitation, investigating other medical causes for bleeding, and treating coagulopathy empirically until laboratory testing becomes available. The most frequent causes for coagulopathy post–cardiac surgery are excess heparinization, prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time, hypothermia, acidosis, and preexisting bleeding diathesis. The management of coagulopathy implies maintenance of the normal physiological conditions for coagulation, reversal of excess heparinization, treatment of hyperfibrinolysis, maintaining normal levels of coagulation factors, and transfusion of platelets if thrombocytopenia or platelet dysfunction occurs. The chapter reviews what is involved in standard laboratory testing (complete blood count, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, fibrinogen level, etc.) for coagulopathy. Also discussed is point-of-care testing and how the results from these tests should be interpreted. The chapter details the various blood products that are required in this scenario and suggests doses and transfusion thresholds.


1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 429-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lamb LSJr ◽  
RS Parrish ◽  
SF Goran ◽  
MH Biel

BACKGROUND: The development of user-friendly laboratory analyzers, combined with the need for rapid assessment of critically ill patients, has led to the performance of in vitro diagnostic testing at the point of care by personnel without formal laboratory training. OBJECTIVES: To determine the range of laboratory testing performed by critical care nurses and their attitudes toward this role. METHODS: A survey of critical care nursing consultants was conducted, using a modified Likert scale, to assess objective measures of point-of-care testing practice in critical care units and to determine nurses' attitudes toward the practice of point-of-care testing. Statistical analysis was performed to determine significant trends in responses. RESULTS: Of the units responding to the survey, 35% used critical care nurses exclusively to perform point-of-care testing, 32.5% used laboratory technicians and critical care nurses, and 25% used other personnel. Of critical care nurses performing laboratory testing, 95.5% performed blood glucose analysis; 18.7%, arterial blood gas analysis; 4.5%, electrolyte analysis; 4.5%, hematology profiles; and 22.7%, other testing. Most agreed that stat tests were not reported promptly, thereby necessitating bedside testing. Respondents indicated that they would prefer that laboratory personnel operate in vitro diagnostic equipment and that requirements for critical care nurses to perform laboratory testing detracted from other patient care duties. CONCLUSIONS: Most nurses who perform point-of-care testing responded that it was necessary and helpful in patient management. However, they would prefer, because of their other patient care responsibilities, that laboratory personnel take this responsibility.


Author(s):  
Urs E. Nydegger ◽  
Erich Gygax ◽  
Thierry Carrel

AbstractPoint-of-care testing (POCT) remains under scrutiny by healthcare professionals because of its ill-tried, young history. POCT methods are being developed by a few major equipment companies based on rapid progress in informatics and nanotechnology. Issues as POCT quality control, comparability with standard laboratory procedures, standardisation, traceability and round robin testing are being left to hospitals. As a result, the clinical and operational benefits of POCT were first evident for patients on the operating table. For the management of cardiovascular surgery patients, POCT technology is an indispensable aid. Improvement of the technology has meant that clinical laboratory pathologists now recognise the need for POCT beyond their high-throughput areas.Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:1060–5.


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 218-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung Hee Han ◽  
Seongsoo Jang ◽  
Mi-Ok Choi ◽  
Mi-Jeong Yoon ◽  
Seung-Bok Lim ◽  
...  

Background: The confirmation of prothrombin time international normalized ratio by a central laboratory often delays intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Objectives: We investigated the feasibility, reliability, and usefulness of point-of-care determination of prothrombin time international normalized ratio for stroke thrombolysis. Methods: Among 312 patients with ischemic stroke, 202 who arrived at the emergency room within 4.5 h of stroke onset were enrolled in the study. Patients with lost orders for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio or central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (n = 47) were excluded. We compared international normalized ratio values and the time interval from arrival to the report of test results (door-to-international normalized ratio time) between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio. In patients who underwent thrombolysis, we compared the time interval from arrival to thrombolysis (door-to-needle time) between the current study population and historic cohort at our center. Results: In the 155 patients included in the study, the median door-to-international normalized ratio time was 9.0 min (interquartile range, 5.0–12.0 min) for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and 46.0 min (interquartile range, 38.0–55.0 min) for central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was 0.975 (95% confidence interval: 0.966–0.982). Forty-nine of the 155 patients underwent intravenous thrombolysis. The door-to-needle time was significantly decreased after implementation of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (median, 23.0 min; interquartile range, 16.0–29.8 vs median, 46.0 min; interquartile range, 33.5–50.5 min). Conclusion: Utilization of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was feasible in the management of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was quick and reliable and had a pivotal role in expediting thrombolysis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. e59-e65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie C Smithgall ◽  
Mitra Dowlatshahi ◽  
Steven L Spitalnik ◽  
Eldad A Hod ◽  
Alex J Rai

Abstract Clinical laboratory testing routinely provides actionable results, which help direct patient care in the inpatient and outpatient settings. Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been causing disease (COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019]) in patients, beginning in China and now extending worldwide. In this context of a novel viral pandemic, clinical laboratories have developed multiple novel assays for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and for managing patients afflicted with this illness. These include molecular and serologic-based tests, some with point-of-care testing capabilities. Herein, we present an overview of the types of testing available for managing patients with COVID-19, as well as for screening of potential plasma donors who have recovered from COVID-19.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e015494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Austen El-Osta ◽  
Maria Woringer ◽  
Elena Pizzo ◽  
Talitha Verhoef ◽  
Claire Dickie ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo determine if use of point of care testing (POCT) is less costly than laboratory testing to the National Health Service (NHS) in delivering the NHS Health Check (NHSHC) programme in the primary care setting.DesignObservational study and theoretical mathematical model with microcosting approach.SettingWe collected data on NHSHC delivered at nine general practices (seven using POCT; two not using POCT).ParticipantsWe recruited nine general practices offering NHSHC and a pathology services laboratory in the same area.MethodsWe conducted mathematical modelling with permutations in the following fields: provider type (healthcare assistant or nurse), type of test performed (total cholesterol with either lab fasting glucose or HbA1c), cost of consumables and variable uptake rates, including rate of non-response to invite letter and rate of missed [did not attend (DNA)] appointments. We calculated total expected cost (TEC) per 100 invites, number of NHSHC conducted per 100 invites and costs for completed NHSHC for laboratory and POCT-based pathways. A univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to account for uncertainty in the input parameters.Main outcome measuresWe collected data on cost, volume and type of pathology services performed at seven general practices using POCT and a pathology services laboratory. We collected data on response to the NHSHC invitation letter and DNA rates from two general practices.ResultsTEC of using POCT to deliver a routine NHSHC is lower than the laboratory-led pathway with savings of £29 per 100 invited patients up the point of cardiovascular disease risk score presentation. Use of POCT can deliver NHSHC in one sitting, whereas the laboratory pathway offers patients several opportunities to DNA appointment.ConclusionsTEC of using POCT to deliver an NHSHC in the primary care setting is lower than the laboratory-led pathway. Using POCT minimises DNA rates associated with laboratory testing and enables completion of NHSHC in one sitting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document