Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center

被引:6
作者
Wiencek, Joesph R. [1 ,2 ]
Head, Carter L. [3 ]
Sifri, Costi D. [4 ,5 ]
Parsons, Andrew S. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Virginia, Sch Med, Dept Pathol, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[2] Univ Virginia Hlth, Lab Stewardship Comm, Charlottesville, VA USA
[3] Univ Virginia, Sch Med, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[4] Univ Virginia, Div Infect Dis & Int Hlth, Sch Med, Dept Med, Charlottesville, VA USA
[5] Univ Virginia Hlth, Off Hosp Epidemiol, Charlottesville, VA USA
[6] Univ Virginia, Sect Hosp Med, Dept Med, Sch Med, Charlottesville, VA USA
关键词
antibody; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; serology; stewardship; utilization; GUIDELINES; COVID-19;
D O I
10.1093/ofid/ofaa406
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]   The Promise and Peril of Antibody Testing for COVID-19 [J].
Abbasi, Jennifer .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2020, 323 (19) :1881-1883
[2]  
AHIP, 2020, NEW STUD COVID 19 TE
[3]   Rapid roll out of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing-a concern [J].
Andersson, Monique ;
Low, Nicola ;
French, Neil ;
Greenhalgh, Trisha ;
Jeffery, Katie ;
Brent, Andrew ;
Ball, Jonathan ;
Pollock, Allyson ;
McCoy, David ;
Iturriza-Gomara, Miren ;
Buchan, Iain ;
Salisbury, Helen ;
Pillay, Deenan ;
Irving, Will .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 369
[4]  
Bendavid E, 2020, COVID 19 ANTIBODY SE, DOI 10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463
[5]  
CDC, 2020, INF LAB COR COVID 19
[6]  
CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), 2020, Center for Disease Control and Prevention WONDER
[7]  
Chew KL, CLIN MICROBIOL INFEC
[8]  
Dickerson JA, 2017, J APPL LAB MED, V2, P259, DOI 10.1373/jalm.2017.023606
[9]   Evidence-Based Guidelines to Eliminate Repetitive Laboratory Testing [J].
Eaton, Kevin P. ;
Levy, Kathryn ;
Soong, Christine ;
Pahwa, Amit K. ;
Petrilli, Christopher ;
Ziemba, Justin B. ;
Cho, Hyung J. ;
Alban, Rodrigo ;
Blanck, Jaime F. ;
Parsons, Andrew S. .
JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2017, 177 (12) :1833-1839
[10]  
Eder S., 2020, NY TIMES