The use of rapid test QuikRead go® Strep A in bacterial pharyngotonsillitis diagnosing and therapeutic decisions

Stefaniuk, Elżbieta; Bosacka, Karolina; Wanke-Rytt, Monika; Hryniewicz, Waleria

doi:10.1007/s10096-017-2986-8

Cited by 18 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The searches identified 80 citations. The full selection process (outlined in Figure 1) resulted in 18 studies 2,6,11,12,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] being included in the review; 10 of these used the Centor score 2,11,12,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] and eight used the McIsaac score. 6,11,12,[32][33][34][35][36][37] Only one study -reported by Fine et al 11,12 -provided sufficient data to allow a direct comparison between the two tests.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of those studies using the Centor score, eight were conducted in Europe 2, [24][25][26][27][29][30][31] and two in the US. 11,12,28 Of those studies using the McIsaac score, three were conducted in Europe, 32,33,36 four in North America, 6,11,12,35,37 and one in Australia. 34 Three studies were translated from Spanish.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For many of the studies, 2,6,[25][26][27][28][30][31][32][33][34][35]37 the reporting was inadequate, which introduced uncertainty when assessing the risk of bias -for example, the method of patient selection was not always described and it was not always clear whether any subjects had been excluded. Often, it was not reported whether the reference standard was carried out blind to the test results, although it is unclear whether knowledge of the test results would have greatly influenced the results of a cultured throat swab.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Centor and McIsaac scores in primary care: a meta-analysis over multiple thresholds

Willis

Coomar

Baragilly³

2020

Br J Gen Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCentor and McIsaac scores are both used to diagnose group A beta-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS) infection, but have not been compared through meta-analysis.AimTo compare the performance of Centor and McIsaac scores at diagnosing patients with GABHS presenting to primary care with pharyngitis.Design and settingA meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies conducted in primary care was performed using a novel model that incorporates data at multiple thresholds.MethodMEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched for studies published between January 1980 and February 2019. Included studies were: cross-sectional; recruited patients with sore throats from primary care; used the Centor or McIsaac score; had GABHS infection as the target diagnosis; used throat swab culture as the reference standard; and reported 2 × 2 tables across multiple thresholds. Selection and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. QUADAS-2 was used to assess study quality. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were synthesised. Calibration curves were used to assess the transferability of results into practice.ResultsTen studies using the Centor score and eight using the McIsaac score were included. The prevalence of GABHS ranged between 4% and 44%. The areas under the SROC curves for McIsaac and Centor scores were 0.7052 and 0.6888, respectively. The P-value for the difference (0.0164) was 0.419, suggesting the SROC curves for the tests are equivalent. Both scores demonstrated poor calibration.ConclusionBoth Centor and McIsaac scores provide only fair discrimination of those with and without GABHS, and appear broadly equivalent in performance. The poor calibration for a positive test result suggests other point-of-care tests are required to rule in GABHS; however, with both Centor and McIsaac scores, a score of ≤0 may be sufficient to rule out infection.

show abstract

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Centor and McIsaac scores in primary care: a meta-analysis over multiple thresholds

Willis

Coomar

Baragilly³

2020

Br J Gen Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additional help can be obtained in differentiation between viral and bacterial pharyngitis by using the so-called Centor/McIsaac score, which is based on clinical signs and symptoms. Good correlation was shown between positive streptococcal test, culture and high score (Stefaniuk et al, 2017). Fewer than half of the Polish physicians participating in our study were not acquainted with this score however they claimed to know the Recommendation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Polish Physicians’ Attitudes Towards Antibiotic Prescription and Antimicrobial Resistance

Mazińska

Hryniewicz

2017

Polish Journal of Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antimicrobial resistance has been one of the biggest global current issues in medicine and public health. Overuse and imprudent use of antimicrobial agents are recognized as one of the leading causes of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to analyze the attitudes of Polish physicians practicing at the community level towards antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance. The majority of physicians taking part in the survey believed that Polish people overuse antibiotics (98%). Most physicians (91%) considered that antimicrobial resistance is a major problem at present. The majority of physicians indicated the reasons for prescribing the antibiotic are related to health factors, such as optimal recovery (best effectiveness, least side effects) (80%), latest therapeutic guidelines (70%) and microbiological/epidemiological factors (63%). Knowledge of the National Recommendations for the management of Community-Acquired Respiratory Tract Infections 2010 (NR-CA-RTI) developed within National Programme for Protection of Antibiotics was declared by 84% of respondents. Among those who are aware of the NR-CA-RTI, the majority follow them in their daily practice (91%). Among physicians, 62% are not familiar with the Centor/McIsaac scores used to differentiate bacterial and viral infections in patients presenting with a sore throat. Among physicians familiar with the scores, 90% use them in their daily practice. Rapid microbiological detection methods for Group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis are used only by 20% of respondents. Almost all of physicians declared readiness to use these tests. Main sources of information on antibiotics prescribing originate from Polish medical journals, scientific conferences organized by medical societies, pharmaceutical companies.

show abstract

“…These tests have a high specificity, and negative predictive value (51). In recent years, similar chromogenic tests have been developed in order to detect the production of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) by Enterobacteriaceae.…”

Section: Rapid Chromogenic Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The next generation of rapid point-of-care testing identification tools for ventilator-associated pneumonia

Millot¹,

Voisin²,

Loïez³

et al. 2017

Ann. Transl. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a frequent issue in intensive care units (ICU), with a major impact on morbidity, mortality and cost of care. VAP diagnosis remains challenging: traditional culture-based microbiological techniques are still the gold-standard, but are too slow to enable clinicians to improve prognosis with timely antimicrobial therapy adjustment. Prolonged exposure to inappropriate antibiotics has also been shown to increase the incidence of multi-drug-resistant organisms (MDROs).Point-of-care testing (POCT) tools are diagnostic testing methods that can be used at or near the bedside, with delays ranging from a couple minutes to a few hours. The use of POCTs for VAP could allow for faster diagnosis and antimicrobial therapy adjustments. Despite uncertainty regarding their diagnostic value, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) can be detected using POCTs in few minutes. In VAP, CRP showed a sensitivity of 56% to 88% and specificity of 86% to 91%; PCT showed a sensitivity of 78% to 100% and a specificity between 75% and 97% using non-POCT methods. Automated microscopy could also be used in clinical ICU setting, with reported sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 97%, allowing for antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) in less than 12 h. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (MPCR) could allow for identification and AST approximation through the detection of drug-resistance genes in about 6 h, with reported sensitivity of 89.2% and specificity of 97.1%; although use as POCT was shown to result in test failure in about 40% of samples. Despite being at an early development stage, exhalome analysis, which allows for non-invasive fast identification, and chromogenic tests, more suited for the detection of drugresistance enzymes, are also promising techniques for POCT diagnosis of VAP.

show abstract

The use of rapid test QuikRead go® Strep A in bacterial pharyngotonsillitis diagnosing and therapeutic decisions

Cited by 18 publications

References 20 publications

Comparison of Centor and McIsaac scores in primary care: a meta-analysis over multiple thresholds

Comparison of Centor and McIsaac scores in primary care: a meta-analysis over multiple thresholds

Polish Physicians’ Attitudes Towards Antibiotic Prescription and Antimicrobial Resistance

The next generation of rapid point-of-care testing identification tools for ventilator-associated pneumonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About