Selected article for: "academic medical center and acute respiratory"

Author: Wiencek, Joesph R; Head, Carter L; Sifri, Costi D; Parsons, Andrew S
Title: Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center
  • Cord-id: t1nkj0zr
  • Document date: 2020_10_9
  • ID: t1nkj0zr
    Snippet: BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in December 2019 and has now infected almost 5 million people in the United States. In the spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite limited evidence-based guidance. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from May 14, 2020, to June 15, 2020, at a large acad
    Document: BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in December 2019 and has now infected almost 5 million people in the United States. In the spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite limited evidence-based guidance. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from May 14, 2020, to June 15, 2020, at a large academic medical center, 1 of the first in the United States to provide antibody testing capability to individual clinicians in order to identify clinician-described indications for antibody testing compared with current expert-based guidance from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). RESULTS: Of 444 individual antibody test results, the 2 most commonly described testing indications, apart from public health epidemiology studies (n = 223), were for patients with a now resolved COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 105) with no previous molecular testing and for asymptomatic patients believed to have had a past exposure to a person with COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 60). The rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing among those indications consistent with current IDSA and CDC guidance was 17% compared with 5% (P < .0001) among those indications inconsistent with such guidance. Testing inconsistent with current expert-based guidance accounted for almost half of testing costs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a dissociation between clinician-described indications for testing and expert-based guidance and a significantly different rate of positive testing between these 2 groups. Clinical curiosity and patient preference appear to have played a significant role in testing decisions and substantially contributed to testing costs.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • abbott architect and additional information: 1, 2
    • abbott architect and low prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • academic medical center and additional information: 1
    • academic medical center and additional patient: 1
    • accurate estimate and additional information: 1, 2
    • accurate estimate and low prevalence: 1
    • additional information and administration cost: 1
    • additional information and low prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • additional patient and administration cost: 1
    • additional patient and administration cost include: 1
    • additional patient and local government: 1
    • local government and low prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5