Point-of-care testing for C-reactive protein in acute cough presentations in primary care

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Simon Searle-Barnes ◽  
Peter Phillips

Acute cough is one of the most common illnesses in the UK, with an estimated 48 million cases per annum. The majority of these presentations are thought to be of viral aetiology and self-limiting in nature, yet some studies report antibiotic prescription rates of approximately 65% in the UK. Clincians' decision-making process can be influenced by both patient expectations and difficulty in differentiating between viral and bacterial aetiologies by clinical examination alone. This article will consider the feasibility, efficacy, benefits and limitations of using point-of-care testing of C-reactive protein within primary care in the United Kingdom to help inform management of acute cough.

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (7) ◽  
pp. 474-481
Author(s):  
José M Ordóñez-Mena ◽  
Thomas R Fanshawe ◽  
David McCartney ◽  
Brian Shine ◽  
Ann Van den Bruel ◽  
...  

Aims C-reactive protein (CRP) and neutrophil count (NC) are important diagnostic indicators of inflammation. Point-of-care (POC) technologies for these markers are available but rarely used in community settings in the UK. To inform the potential for POC tests, it is necessary to understand the demand for testing. We aimed to describe the frequency of CRP and NC test requests from primary care to central laboratory services, describe variability between practices and assess the relationship between the tests.MethodsWe described the number of patients with either or both laboratory tests, and the volume of testing per individual and per practice, in a retrospective cohort of all adults in general practices in Oxfordshire, 2014–2016.Results372 017 CRP and 776 581 NC tests in 160 883 and 275 093 patients, respectively, were requested from 69 practices. CRP was tested mainly in combination with NC, while the latter was more often tested alone. The median (IQR) of CRP and NC tests/person tested was 1 (1–2) and 2 (1–3), respectively. The median (IQR) tests/practice/week was 36 (22–52) and 72 (50–108), and per 1000 persons registered/practice/week was 4 (3–5) and 8 (7–9), respectively. The median (IQR) CRP and NC concentrations were 2.7 (0.9–7.9) mg/dL and 4.1 (3.1–5.5)×109/L, respectively.ConclusionsThe high demand for CRP and NC testing in the community, and the range of results falling within the reportable range for current POC technologies highlight the opportunity for laboratory testing to be supplemented by POC testing in general practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e000624
Author(s):  
Jonathan Cooke ◽  
Carl Llor ◽  
Rogier Hopstaken ◽  
Matthew Dryden ◽  
Christopher Butler

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) continues to be a global problem and continues to be addressed through national strategies to improve diagnostics, develop new antimicrobials and promote antimicrobial stewardship. Patients who attend general (ambulatory) practice with symptoms of respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are invariably assessed by some sort of clinical decision rule (CDR). However, CDRs rely on a cluster of non-specific clinical observations. A narrative review of the literature was undertaken to ascertain the value of C reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing (POCT) to guide antibacterial prescribing in adult patients presenting to general practitioner (GP) practices with symptoms of RTI. Studies that were included were Cochrane reviews, systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, cluster randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, cohort studies and economic evaluations. An overwhelming number of studies demonstrated that the use of CRP tests in patients presenting with RTI symptoms reduces index antibacterial prescribing. GPs and patients report a good acceptability for a CRP POCT and economic evaluations show cost-effectiveness of CRP POCT over existing RTI management in primary care. POCTs increase diagnostic precision for GPs in the better management of patients with RTI. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence, patients will expect greater precision in diagnosing and managing their illnesses. Adopting systems that markedly reduce antibiotic consumption is a no-brainer for governments that are struggling to address the rise in AMR.


2016 ◽  
Vol 101 (4) ◽  
pp. 382-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Van den Bruel ◽  
Caroline Jones ◽  
Matthew Thompson ◽  
David Mant

BackgroundPoint-of-care C-reactive protein (CRP) testing of adults with acute respiratory infection in primary care reduces antibiotic prescribing by 22%. The acceptability and impact of CRP testing in children is unknownObjectiveTo determine the acceptability and impact of CRP testing in acutely ill children.DesignMixed methods study comprising an observational cohort with a nested randomised controlled trial and embedded qualitative study.Subjects and settingChildren presenting with an acute illness to general practice out-of-hours services; children with a temperature ≥38°C were randomised in the nested trial; parents and clinical staff were invited to the qualitative study.Main outcomesInformed consent rates; parental and staff views on testing.ResultsConsent to involvement in the study was obtained for 200/297 children (67.3%, 95% CI 61.7% to 72.6%); the finger-prick test might have been a contributory factor for 63 of the 97 children declining participation but it was cited as a definite factor in only 10 cases. None of the parents or staff raised concerns about the acceptability of testing, describing the pain caused as minor and transient. General practitioner views on the utility of the CRP test were inconsistent.ConclusionsCRP point-of-care testing in children is feasible in primary care and is likely to be acceptable. However, it will not reduce antibiotic prescribing and hospital referrals until general practitioners accept its diagnostic value in children.Trial registration numberISRCTN 69736109.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 219-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaretha C. Minnaard ◽  
Janna van der Zand ◽  
Alma C. van de Pol ◽  
Niek J. de Wit ◽  
Alwin Schierenberg ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e040977
Author(s):  
Nga Thi Thuy Do ◽  
Rachel Claire Greer ◽  
Yoel Lubell ◽  
Sabine Dittrich ◽  
Maida Vandendorpe ◽  
...  

IntroductionC-reactive protein (CRP), a biomarker of infection, has been used widely in high-income settings to guide antibiotic treatment in patients presenting with respiratory illnesses in primary care. Recent trials in low- and middle-income countries showed that CRP testing could safely reduce antibiotic use in patients with non-severe acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and fever in primary care. The studies, however, were conducted in a research-oriented context, with research staff closely monitoring healthcare behaviour thus potentially influencing healthcare workers’ prescribing practices. For policy-makers to consider wide-scale roll-out, a pragmatic implementation study of the impact of CRP point of care (POC) testing in routine care is needed.Methods and analysisA pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial, with two study arms, consisting of 24 commune health centres (CHC) in the intervention arm (provision of CRP tests with additional healthcare worker guidance) and 24 facilities acting as controls (routine care). Comparison between the treatment arms will be through logistic regression, with the treatment assignment as a fixed effect, and the CHC as a random effect. With 48 clusters, an average of 10 consultations per facility per week will result in approximately 520 over 1 year, and 24 960 in total (12 480 per arm). We will be able to detect a reduction of 12% to 23% or more in immediate antibiotic prescription as a result of the CRP POC intervention. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patient consultations for ARI resulting in immediate antibiotic prescription. Secondary endpoints include the proportion of all patients receiving an antibiotic prescription regardless of ARI diagnosis, frequency of re-consultation, subsequent antibiotic use when antibiotics are not prescribed, referral and hospitalisation.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Oxford University Tropical Research Ethics Committee (OxTREC, Reference: 53–18), and the ethical committee of the National Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Vietnam (Reference:07/HDDD-NDTW/2019). Results from this study will be disseminated via meetings with stakeholders, conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals. Authorship and reporting of this work will follow international guidelines.Trial registration detailsNCT03855215; Pre-results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document