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
[21]   Report from the American Society for Microbiology COVID-19 International Summit, 23 March 2020: Value of Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 [J].
Patel, Robin ;
Babady, Esther ;
Theel, Elitza S. ;
Storch, Gregory A. ;
Pinsky, Benjamin A. ;
St George, Kirsten ;
Smith, Tara C. ;
Bertuzzi, Stefano .
MBIO, 2020, 11 (02)
[22]  
Shen L, 2020, EMERG MICROBES INFEC, V9, P1096, DOI DOI 10.1080/22221751.2020.1766382
[23]   An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success [J].
Sutton, Reed T. ;
Pincock, David ;
Baumgart, Daniel C. ;
Sadowski, Daniel C. ;
Fedorak, Richard N. ;
Kroeker, Karen, I .
NPJ DIGITAL MEDICINE, 2020, 3 (01)
[24]  
Tahamtan A, EXPERT REV MOL DIAGN
[25]  
US Department of the Treasury, CAR ACT WORKS ALL AM
[26]  
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, ANT TEST COVID 19 WH
[27]  
Wu AHB, J APPL LAB MED