The argument for rapid influenza polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during the COVID-19 pandemic: Quicker turnaround times correlated with decreased antimicrobial use, reduced admission rates, and shorter length of stay

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Avnish K. Sandhu ◽  
Jennifer J. LeRose ◽  
Alpana Garg ◽  
Jordan Polistico ◽  
Teena Chopra
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Respiratory Illnesses ◽  
Admission Rates ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
Tertiary Healthcare ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Influenza Polymerase

Abstract The innovation of rapid influenza polymerase chain reaction (XT-PCR) has allowed quick, highly sensitive test results. Consequently, physicians can differentiate influenza from other respiratory illnesses and rapidly initiate treatment. We examined the effect of implementing XT-PCR on antimicrobial use, admission rates, and length of stay at a tertiary healthcare system.

scholarly journals 213. An Analysis of the Impact of Gastrointestinal Polymerase Chain Reaction Panel Use on Antimicrobial use at a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S109-S109
Author(s):  
Zola Nlandu ◽  
Nicholas Piccicacco ◽  
Kristen Zeitler ◽  
Ripal Jariwala ◽  
Jose Montero
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Antimicrobial Therapy ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Prescribing Patterns ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Gastrointestinal Polymerase Chain Reaction (GI PCR) panels are increasingly utilized in place of conventional stool testing methods. Several studies have noted GI PCR testing is associated with a reduction in antibiotic prescribing. As it relates to the appropriate timing to order this test in hospitalized patients, one study showed decreased utility when ordered more than 72 hours into admission. At Tampa General Hospital, we utilize the BioFire® FilmArray® GI PCR panel. Since implementation in March 2015, its impact on antimicrobial use has not been formally assessed. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of the GI PCR panel and determine its usefulness as a potential tool for antimicrobial stewardship. Methods We conducted an IRB approved retrospective chart review in adult patients admitted to our institution who were ordered the GI PCR panel between 1/1/2018 and 12/31/19. Our primary objective was to assess antimicrobial prescribing patterns; secondary objectives included determining the quantity of tests ordered after 72 hours of admission and inpatient length of stay. Results Our initial chart review of 50 patients who were ordered the GI PCR panel revealed 60 % (n = 30) females with an overall median age of 55 years (interquartile range (IQR): 40.75,66.75). GI PCRs were ordered a median of 1 day into the hospital admission (IQR: 1,3) with 6 patients having a test ordered longer than 72 hours into their admission. The median length of stay was 5 days (IQR: 3,7). Testing was negative for 82 % of patients. For patients with positive tests, the most common pathogen identified was E coli (EPEC). Five out of 50 patients (10%) had antimicrobial therapy modified after GI PCR results. Internal medicine providers ordered the majority of tests in these patients (n = 26 (52 %)). Conclusion Our findings suggest the majority of GI PCRs were ordered within 72 hours of admission. However, changes in antimicrobial therapy were minimal. A limitation of our study includes patients who were on antimicrobials for other indications. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals Analysis and validation of a highly sensitive one-step nested quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for specific detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Zhang ◽  
Chunyang Dai ◽  
Huiyan Wang ◽  
Yong Gao ◽  
Tuantuan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
One Step ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, is posing a serious threat to global public health. Reverse transcriptase real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) is widely used as the gold standard for clinical detection of SARS-CoV-2. Due to technical limitations, the reported positive rates of qRT-PCR assay of throat swab samples vary from 30 to 60%. Therefore, the evaluation of alternative strategies to overcome the limitations of qRT-PCR is required. A previous study reported that one-step nested (OSN)-qRT-PCR revealed better suitability for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, information on the analytical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR is insufficient. Method In this study, we aimed to analyze OSN-qRT-PCR by comparing it with droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and qRT-PCR by using a dilution series of SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviral RNA and a quality assessment panel. The clinical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR was also validated and compared with ddPCR and qRT-PCR using specimens from COVID-19 patients. Result The limit of detection (copies/ml) of qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and OSN-qRT-PCR were 520.1 (95% CI: 363.23–1145.69) for ORF1ab and 528.1 (95% CI: 347.7–1248.7) for N, 401.8 (95% CI: 284.8–938.3) for ORF1ab and 336.8 (95% CI: 244.6–792.5) for N, and 194.74 (95% CI: 139.7–430.9) for ORF1ab and 189.1 (95% CI: 130.9–433.9) for N, respectively. Of the 34 clinical samples from COVID-19 patients, the positive rates of OSN-qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and qRT-PCR were 82.35% (28/34), 67.65% (23/34), and 58.82% (20/34), respectively. Conclusion In conclusion, the highly sensitive and specific OSN-qRT-PCR assay is superior to ddPCR and qRT-PCR assays, showing great potential as a technique for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with low viral loads.

PCR BY THERMAL CONVECTION

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (16) ◽  
pp. 775-784 ◽  
Author(s):  
DIETER BRAUN
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Thermal Convection ◽  
Dna Amplification ◽  
Reaction Vessel ◽  
Cold Region ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Heating And Cooling ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
Specific Amplification ◽  
Polymerase Chain

The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) allows for highly sensitive and specific amplification of DNA. It is the backbone of many genetic experiments and tests. Recently, three labs independently uncovered a novel and simple way to perform a PCR reaction. Instead of repetitive heating and cooling, a temperature gradient across the reaction vessel drives thermal convection. By convection, the reaction liquid circulates between hot and cold regions of the chamber. The convection triggers DNA amplification as the DNA melts into two single strands in the hot region and replicates into twice the amount in the cold region. The amplification progresses exponentially as the convection moves on. We review the characteristics of the different approaches and show the benefits and prospects of the method.

scholarly journals COVID-19 testing: Essential for tracking infection and helping authority to overcome the challenges of spread

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-92
Author(s):  
Rano Mal Piryani ◽  
Suneel Piryani ◽  
Shomeeta Piryani ◽  
Ganesh Dangal ◽  
Muzaherul Huq ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Blood Sample ◽  
Ribonucleic Acid ◽  
World Health ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Infected People ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Health Organization

COVID-19 is mainly transmitted through droplet infection and spread very fast compared to SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. For the countries, it is important to know at what stage the COVID-19 epidem­ic is? So, as to take appropriate steps to contain the epidemic. This will only be known by testing the suspects and contacts of confirmed cases. If there is poor testing, then most of the infected people may remain undetected, however they could spread the virus to hundreds of other people and potential contacts, which could not be known and quarantined in time continuing the spread. If there is quality assured, highly sensitive and specific testing along with adequate isolation and quarantine, then the spread will be limited. There are two types of tests available for COVID-19: the tests directly detecting the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) collected in nasopharyngeal or throat swabs, and tests detecting antibodies from the blood sample. At this point in time, the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are used for confirmation of the disease while antibodies tests may provide information regarding the prevalence of infection. World Health Organization advices the countries to increase the testing and get to know the level of epidemic and act accordingly for containment of infection.

scholarly journals Impact of Respiratory Viral Panel Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay Turnaround Time on Length of Stay and Antibiotic Use in Patients With Respiratory Viral Illnesses

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (9) ◽  
pp. 640-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Choi ◽  
Rubiya Kabir ◽  
Pranisha Gautam-Goyal ◽  
Prashant Malhotra
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Turnaround Time ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Background: Respiratory viral illnesses account for many hospitalizations and inappropriate antibiotic use. Respiratory viral panels by polymerase chain reaction (RVP-PCR) provide a reliable means of diagnosis. In 2015, the RVP-PCR assay at our institution was switched from respiratory viral panel (RVP) to rapid respiratory panel (rapid RP), which has a faster turnaround time (24 hours vs 12 hours, respectively). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of RVP-PCR tests on duration of antibiotic use and length of stay (LOS) in hospitalized patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who had a RVP-PCR ordered within a 1-year time period before and after the assay switch. Patients who were pregnant, had received antibiotics within 30 days prior to admission, were not discharged, or had not completed antibiotics by end of study period were excluded. Results: Data were obtained from a total of 140 patients (70 in each group). Of these, 25 (35.7%) in the RVP group and 28 (40.0%) in the rapid RP group had a positive result. The median LOS was 4.5 days (IQR, 3-9 days) in the RVP group and 5 days (IQR, 3-9 days) in the rapid RP group ( P = .78). The median duration of antibiotic use was 4 days (IQR, 2-7 days) in the RVP group and 5 days (IQR, 1-7 days) in the rapid RP group ( P = .8). Conclusion: Despite faster turnaround time, there was no significant difference in duration of antibiotic use, or LOS between the RVP and rapid RP groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document