PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Kortüm, S.
AU  - Krause, M.
AU  - Ott, H.-J.
AU  - Kortüm, L.
AU  - Schlaudt, H-P.
TI  - Molecular point-of-care testing for SARS-CoV-2 using the ID NOW™ System in Emergency Department: Prospective Evaluation and Implementation in the Care Process
AID  - 10.1101/2021.09.09.21263266
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.09.09.21263266
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/13/2021.09.09.21263266.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/13/2021.09.09.21263266.full
AB  - Background The increasing number of cases and hospital admissions due to COVID-19 created an urgent need for rapid, reliable testing procedures for SARS-CoV-2 in Emergency Departments (ED) in order to effectively manage hospital resources, allocate beds and prevent nosocomial spread of infection. The ID NOW™ COVID-19 assay is a simple, user-friendly, rapid molecular test run on an instrument with a small footprint enabling point-of-care diagnostics.Methods In the first wave, outsourced RT-PCR testing regularly required 36-48 hours before results were available. This prospective study was conducted in the second wave (October 2020-April 2021) and evaluated the impact the implementation of the ID NOW™ COVID-19 test in the ED had on clinical care processes and patient pathways. 710 patients were recruited upon arrival at the ED which included those presenting clinical symptoms, asymptomatic individuals or persons fulfilling epidemiological criteria. The first anterior nasal swab was taken by trained nurses in the ambulance or a separate consultation room. The ID NOW™ COVID-19 test was performed in the ED in strict compliance with the manufacturer’s instructions and positive or suspected cases were additionally tested with RT_PCR (cobas SARS-COV-2 RT-PCR, Roche) following collection of a second nasopharyngeal NP specimen.Results Swabs directly tested with the ID NOW™ COVID-19 test showed a diagnostic concordance of 98 % (sensitivity 99.59 %, specificity 94.55 %, PPV 97.6 %, NPV 99.05 %) compared to RT-PCR as reference. The 488 patients that tested positive with the ID NOW™ COVID-19 had a Ct range in RT-PCR results between 7.94 to 37.42 (in 23.2 % > 30). Two false negative results (0.28%) were recorded from patients with Ct values > 30. 14 (1.69%) discordant results were reviewed case-by-case and usually associated with either very early or very advanced stages of infection. Furthermore, patients initially negative with the ID NOW™ COVID-19 test and admitted to the hospital were tested again on days 5 and 12: no patient became positive.Discussion The ID NOW™ COVID-19 test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 demonstrated excellent diagnostic agreement with RT-PCR under the above-mentioned patients pathways implemented during the second wave. The main advantage of the system was the provision of reliable results within a few minutes. This not only allowed immediate initiative of appropriate therapy and care for COVID-19 (patient benefit) but provided essential information on isolation and thus available beds. This drastically helped the overall finances of the department and additionally allowed more patients to be admitted including those requiring immediate attention; this was not possible during the first wave since beds were blocked waiting for diagnostic confirmation. Our findings also show that when interpreting the results, the clinical condition and epidemiological history of the patient must be taken into account, as with any test procedure. Overall, the ID NOW™ COVID-19 test for SARS-CoV-2 provided a rapid and reliable alternative to laboratory-based RT-PCR in the real clinical setting which became an acceptable part of the daily routine within the ED and demonstrated that early patient management can mitigate the impact of the pandemic on the hospital.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialThis is an observational study, interventions were not carried out.Funding StatementThere was no external funding received.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The independent Clinical Ethics Committee at the Klinikum Hochrhein, headed by the external chairman, has decided that an ethical approval is not required for the study Molecular point-of-care testing for SARS-CoV-2 using the ID NOW(TM) System in Emergency Department: Prospective Evaluation and Implementation in the Care Process. None of the authors were involved in this decision.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data are archived and available with the authors