Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sneltests: hoop of hype?

  • Beschouwing
  • Published:
Huisarts en wetenschap Aims and scope

Samenvatting

Cals JWL, Van Weert HCPM. Sneltests: hoop of hype? Huisarts Wet 2011;54(10):543-7.

Sneltests zijn biomedische tests die de huisarts verricht op patiëntenmateriaal, zoals bloed, urine en feces. Het gebruik van deze veelal nieuwe tests in de huisartsenpraktijk neemt toe. Sneltests vergroten het diagnostisch arsenaal van de huisarts. Maar dragen ze ook altijd bij aan een doelmatige en kwalitatief goede diagnostiek? We presenteren een lijstje met criteria aan de hand waarvan richtlijnmakers, regionale organisaties en individuele huisartsen een nieuwe sneltest in de praktijk kunnen toetsen. Het gaat daarbij niet louter om uitvoeringsen kwaliteitscriteria. De sneltest dient in de juiste populatie voor de juiste indicaties te zijn geëvalueerd. En dan moeten we ons ook houden aan die indicaties – verbreding van het indicatiegebied ligt immers steeds op de loer, met een ongewild risico op foutpositieve en foutnegatieve testuitslagen. Bij problemen in de vergoedingensfeer en om kwaliteitscontrole te garanderen kunnen lokale klinischchemische laboratoria mogelijk een rol spelen.

Abstract

Cals JWL, Van Weert HCPM. Point-of-care tests: hope or hype? Huisarts Wet 2011;54(10):543-7.

Point-of-care tests are tests for patient samples (blood, urine, faeces) that general practitioners can perform in their practices. The use of these, often new, tests is increasing in general practice and extends the diagnostic arsenal of GPs. But do these tests always contribute to a focused and good diagnostic process? We present a list of criteria which policy makers, regional authorities, and GPs can use to assess a new pointofcare test in practice. These criteria concern not only the implementation and quality of the tests but also their use in appropriate populations and for appropriate indications. These indications should be adhered to, because expanding the indications for medical testing affects the risk of false positive and false negative results. Local clinical diagnostic laboratories could have a role in the case of reimbursement problems and in guaranteeing quality control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatuur

  1. Hofland HJ. Point of care testing and selftest related consultations in general practices in the Netherlands: an exploratory study on general practitioners’ experiences. Enschede: Universiteit Twente, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ronda G, Portegijs P, Dinant GJ, Buntinx F, Norg R, Van der Weijden T. Use of diagnostic self-tests on body materials among Internet users in the Netherlands: prevalence and correlates of use. BMC Public Health 2009;9:100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ryan A, Ives J, Wilson S, Greenfield S. Why members of the public self-test: an interview study. Fam Pract 2010;27:570–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Grispen JE, Ickenroth MH, De Vries NK, Dinant GJ, Ronda G, Van der Weijden T. Improving behaviour in self-testing (IBIS): Study on frequency of use, consequences, information needs and use, and quality of currently available consumer information (protocol). BMC Public Health 2010;10:453.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Delaney BC, Hyde CJ, McManus RJ, Wilson S, Fitzmaurice DA, Jowett S, et al. Systematic review of near patient test evaluations in primary care. BMJ 1999;319:824–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gutierres SL, Welty TE. Point-of-care testing: an introduction. Ann Pharma cother 2004;38:119–25.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Price CP. Point of care testing. BMJ 2001;322:1285–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Laurence CO, Gialamas A, Bubner T, Yelland L, Willson K, Ryan P, et al. Patient satisfaction with point-of-care testing in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2010;60:e98–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Junker R, Schlebusch H, Luppa PB. Point-of-care testing in hospitals and primary care. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:561–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Buller HR, Ten Cate-Hoek AJ, Hoes AW, Joore MA, Moons KG, Oudega R, et al. Safely ruling out deep venous thrombosis in primary care. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:229–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gialamas A, St John A, Laurence CO, Bubner TK. Point-of-care testing for patients with diabetes, hyperlipidaemia or coagulation disorders in the general practice setting: a systematic review. Fam Pract 2010;27:17–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gialamas A, Yelland LN, Ryan P, Willson K, Laurence CO, Bubner TK, et al. Does point-of-care testing lead to the same or better adherence to medication? A randomised controlled trial: the PoCT in General Practice Trial. Med J Aust 2009;191:487–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Llor C, Hernandez S, Sierra N, Moragas A, Hernandez M, Bayona C. Association between use of rapid antigen detection tests and adherence to antibiotics in suspected streptococcal pharyngitis. Scand J Prim Health Care 2010;28:12–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Llor C, Sierra N, Hernandez S, Moragas A, Hernandez M, Bayona C, et al. Impact of C-reactive protein testing on adherence to thrice-daily antibiotic regimens in patients with lower respiratory tract infection. Prim Care Respir J 2010;19:358–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koch H, Van Bokhoven MA, Ter Riet G, Van Alphen-Jager JT, Van der Weijden T, Dinant GJ, et al. Ordering blood tests for patients with unexplained fatigue in general practice: what does it yield? Results of the VAMPIRE trial. Br J Gen Pract 2009;59:e93–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cals JW, Geersing GJ. Near-patient testing holds most promise for acute conditions. Br J Gen Pract 2010;60:450–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hopstaken RM, Muris JWM, Knottnerus JA, Kester ADM, Rinkens PELM, Dinant GJ. Contributions of symptoms, signs, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein to a diagnosis of pneumonia in acute lower respiratory tract infection. Br J Gen Pract 2003;53:358–64.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Cals JW, Butler CC, Hopstaken RM, Hood K, Dinant GJ. Effect of point of care testing for C reactive protein and training in communication skills on antibiotic use in lower respiratory tract infections: cluster randomised trial. BMJ 2009;338:b1374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bruins Slot MH, Van der Heijden GJ, Rutten FH, Van der Spoel OP, Mast EG, Bredero AC, et al. Heart-type Fatty acid-binding protein in Acute Myocardial infarction Evaluation (FAME): Background and design of a diagnostic study in primary care. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2008;8:8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bruins Slot MH, Reitsma JB, Rutten FH, Hoes AW, Van der Heijden GJ. Heart-type fatty acid-binding protein in the early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2010;96:1957–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Geersing GJ, Janssen KJ, Oudega R, Bax L, Hoes AW, Reitsma JB, et al. Excluding venous thromboembolism using point of care D-dimer tests in outpatients: a diagnostic meta-analysis. BMJ 2009;339:b2990.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Oudega R, Van Weert H, Stoffers H, Sival P, Schure R, Delemarre J, et al. NHG Standaard Diepe veneuze trombose. Huisarts Wet 2008;51:24–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ten Cate-Hoek AJ, Toll DB, Buller HR, Hoes AW, Moons KG, Oudega R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of ruling out deep venous thrombosis in primary care versus care as usual. J Thromb Haemost 2009;7:2042–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lucassen WA, Douma RA, Toll DB, Buller HR, Van Weert HC. Excluding pulmonary embolism in primary care using the Wells-rule in combination with a point-of care D-dimer test: a scenario analysis. BMC Fam Pract 2010;11:64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. vakgroep Huisartsgeneeskunde, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Universiteit Maastricht, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    J.W.L. Cals

  2. afdeling Huisartsgeneeskunde, divisie Klinische methoden en Public Health, AMC Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    H.C.P.M. van Weert

Authors
  1. J.W.L. Cals
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H.C.P.M. van Weert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

huisarts in opleiding en post-doc onderzoeker

hoogleraar Huisartsgeneeskunde

About this article

Cite this article

Cals, J., van Weert, H. Sneltests: hoop of hype?. HUISARTS WETENSCHAP 54, 543–547 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12445-011-0263-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12445-011-0263-0

Search

Navigation