Clinical impact of rapid molecular diagnostic tests in patients presenting with viral respiratory symptoms: A systematic literature review
Ali Mojebi,Ping Wu,Sam Keeping,Braden Hale,Jordan G Chase,Anne Beaubrun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303560
IF: 3.7
2024-06-13
PLoS ONE
Abstract:Background: Molecular tests can detect lower concentrations of viral genetic material over a longer period of respiratory infection than antigen tests. Delays associated with central laboratory testing can result in hospital-acquired transmission, avoidable patient admission, and unnecessary use of antimicrobials, all which may lead to increased cost of patient management. The aim of this study was to summarize comparisons of clinical outcomes associated with rapid molecular diagnostic tests (RMDTs) versus other diagnostic tests for viral respiratory infections. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) conducted in April 2023 identified studies evaluating clinical outcomes of molecular and antigen diagnostic tests for patients suspected of having respiratory viral infections. Results: The SLR included 21 studies, of which seven and 14 compared RMDTs (conducted at points of care or at laboratories) to standard (non-rapid) molecular tests or antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, respectively. In studies testing for SARS-CoV-2, RMDTs led to reductions in time to test results versus standard molecular tests (range of the reported medians: 0.2-3.8 hours versus 4.3-35.9 hours), with similar length of emergency department stay (3.2-8 hours versus 3.7-28.8 hours). Similarly, in studies testing for influenza, RMDTs led to reductions in time to test results versus standard molecular tests (1-3.5 hours versus 18.2-29.2 hours), with similar length of emergency department stay (3.7-11 hours versus 3.8-11.9 hours). RMDTs were found to decrease exposure time of uninfected patients, rate of hospitalization, length of stay at the hospitals, and frequency of unnecessary antiviral and antibacterial therapy, while improving patient flow, compared to other tests. Conclusions: Compared to other diagnostic tests, RMDTs improve clinical outcomes, test turnaround time, and stewardship by decreasing unnecessary use of antibiotics and antivirals. They also reduce hospital admission and length of stay, which may, in turn, reduce unnecessary exposure of patients to hospital-acquired infections and their associated costs.