scholarly journals Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Fecal Calprotectin and Immunochemical Occult Blood Tests for Diagnosis of Organic Bowel Disease in Primary Care: The Cost-Effectiveness of a Decision Rule for Abdominal Complaints in Primary Care (CEDAR) Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 58 (6) ◽  
pp. 989-998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liselotte Kok ◽  
Sjoerd G Elias ◽  
Ben J M Witteman ◽  
Jelle G Goedhard ◽  
Jean W M Muris ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Fecal biomarker tests that differentiate between organic bowel disease (OBD) and non-OBD in primary care patients with persistent lower-abdomen complaints could reduce the number of unnecessary referrals for endoscopy. We quantified the accuracy of fecal calprotectin and immunochemical occult blood (iFOBT) point-of-care (POC) tests and a calprotectin ELISA in primary care patients with suspected OBD. METHODS We performed biomarker tests on fecal samples from 386 patients with lower-abdomen complaints suggestive for OBD. Endoscopic and histological diagnosis served as reference. RESULTS OBD was diagnosed in 99 patients (prevalence 25.9%); 19 had adenocarcinoma, 53 adenoma, and 27 inflammatory bowel disease. Sensitivity for OBD was 0.64 (95% CI 0.54–0.72) for calprotectin POC, 0.56 (0.46–0.66) for iFOBT POC, and 0.74 (0.65–0.82) for calprotectin ELISA; specificities were 0.53 (0.48–0.59), 0.83 (0.78–0.87), and 0.47 (0.41–0.53), respectively. Negative predictive values (NPVs) were 0.81 (0.74–0.86), 0.85 (0.80–0.88), and 0.84 (0.78–0.89); positive predictive values (PPVs) varied from 0.32 (0.26–0.39) and 0.33 (0.27–0.39) (calprotectin tests) to 0.53 (0.44–0.63) (iFOBT POC). Combining the 2 POC tests improved sensitivity [0.79 (0.69–0.86)] and NPV [0.87 (0.81–0.91)] but lowered specificity [0.49 (0.44–0.55)] and PPV [0.35 (0.29–0.42)]. When adenomas ≤1 cm were considered non-OBD, the NPV of all tests improved to >0.90 [combined POC tests, 0.97 (0.93–0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS Diagnostic accuracy of the tests alone or combined was insufficient when all adenomas were considered OBD. When only adenomas >1 cm were considered OBD, all tests could rule out OBD to a reasonable extent, particularly the combined POC tests. The tests were less useful for inclusion of OBD.

2010 ◽  
Vol 56 (11) ◽  
pp. 1758-1766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geert-Jan Geersing ◽  
Diane B Toll ◽  
Kristel JM Janssen ◽  
Ruud Oudega ◽  
Marloes JC Blikman ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Point-of-care D-dimer tests have recently been introduced to enable rapid exclusion of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) without the need to refer a patient for conventional laboratory-based D-dimer testing. Before implementation in practice, however, the diagnostic accuracy of each test should be validated. METHODS We analyzed data of 577 prospectively identified consecutive primary care patients suspected to have DVT, who underwent 5 point-of-care D-dimer tests—4 quantitative (Vidas®, Pathfast™, Cardiac®, and Triage®) and 1 qualitative (Clearview Simplify®)—and ultrasonography as the reference method. We evaluated the tests for the accuracy of their measurements and submitted a questionnaire to 20 users to assess the user-friendliness of each test. RESULTS All D-dimer tests showed negative predictive values higher than 98%. Sensitivity was high for all point-of-care tests, with a range of 0.91 (Clearview Simplify) to 0.99 (Vidas). Specificity varied between 0.39 (Pathfast) and 0.64 (Clearview Simplify). The quantitative point-of-care tests showed similar and high discriminative power for DVT, according to calculated areas under the ROC curves (range 0.88–0.89). The quantitative Vidas and Pathfast devices showed limited user-friendliness for primary care, owing to a laborious calibration process and long analyzer warm-up time compared to the Cardiac and Triage. For the qualitative Clearview Simplify assay, no analyzer or calibration was needed, but interpretation of a test result was sometimes difficult because of poor color contrast. CONCLUSIONS Point-of-care D-dimer assays show good and similar diagnostic accuracy. The quantitative Cardiac and Triage and the qualitative Clearview Simplify D-dimer seem most user-friendly for excluding DVT in the doctor's office.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Bing-Jie Xiang ◽  
Min Jiang ◽  
Ming-Jun Sun ◽  
Cong Dai

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> Fecal calprotectin (FC) is a promising marker for assessment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) activity. However, the utility of FC for predicting mucosal healing (MH) of IBD patients has yet to be clearly demonstrated. The objective of our study was to perform a meta-analysis evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of FC in predicting MH of IBD patients. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We systematically searched the databases for studies from inception to April 2020 that evaluated MH in IBD. The methodological quality of each study was assessed according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies checklist. The extracted data were pooled using a summary receiver operating characteristic curve model. Random-effects model was used to summarize the diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Sixteen studies comprising 1,682 ulcerative colitis (UC) patients and 4 studies comprising 221 Crohn’s disease (CD) patients were included. The best performance of FC for predicting MH in UC was at cut-off range of 60–75 μg/g with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 and pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.87 and 0.79, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values of cutoff range 180–250 μg/g for predicting MH in CD were 0.67 and 0.76, respectively. The AUC of 0.79 also revealed improved discrimination for identifying MH in CD with FC concentration. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our meta-analysis has found that FC is a simple, reliable noninvasive marker for predicting MH in IBD patients. FC cutoff range 60–75 μg/g appears to have the best overall accuracy in UC patients.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gea A Holtman ◽  
Leeuwen Yvonne Lisman-van ◽  
Boudewijn J Kollen ◽  
Johanna C Escher ◽  
Angelika Kindermann ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
James G. Anderson ◽  
E. Andres Balas

The objective of this study was to assess the current level of information technology used by primary care physicians in the U.S. Primary care physicians listed by the American Medical Association were contacted by e-mail and asked to complete a Web-based questionnaire. A total of 2,145 physicians responded. Overall between 20% and 25% of primary care physicians reported using electronic medical records, e-prescribing, point-of-care decision support tools and electronic communication with patients. This indicates a slow rate of adoption since 2000-2001. Differences in adoption rates suggest that future surveys need to differentiate primary care and office-based physicians by specialty. An important finding is that one-third of the physicians surveyed expressed no interest in the four IT applications. Overcoming this barrier may require efforts by medical specialty societies to educate their members as to the benefits of IT in practice. The majority of physicians perceived benefits of IT, but they cited costs, vendor inability to deliver acceptable products and concerns about privacy and confidentiality as major barriers to implementation of IT applications. Overcoming the cost barrier may require that payers and the federal government share the costs of implementing these IT applications.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 1340-1342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew D. Schreiner ◽  
Don C. Rockey ◽  
William P. Moran

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sukhmeet Singh ◽  
Paul Scouller ◽  
Daniel J. Smith

Aims and methodThe mean delay for bipolar disorder diagnosis is 10 years. Identification of patients with previous hypomania is challenging, sometimes resulting in misdiagnosis. The aims of this study were: (a) to estimate the proportion of primary care patients with depression currently taking antidepressants who have undiagnosed bipolar disorder and (b) to compare a brief 3-item manic features questionnaire with the Hypomania Checklist (HCL-13). The sample comprised patients with a recorded diagnosis of depression, either on long-term antidepressant therapy or with previous multiple courses of antidepressants.ResultsOf 149 participants assessed, 24 (16.1%) satisfied criteria for bipolar disorder. Areas under the curve (AUC) for the 3-item questionnaire and the HCL-13 were similar (0.79 and 0.72, respectively) but positive predictive values (PPV) were low.Clinical implicationsBipolar disorder may be underdiagnosed in primary care. A 3-item questionnaire could be used by general practitioners to screen for bipolar disorder in their patients with depression.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document