PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Hawthorne, Gabriel AU - Harvey, Adam TI - Real-world clinical performance of SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care diagnostic tests: a systematic review of available trials as per April, 4, 2021 AID - 10.1101/2021.09.20.21263509 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.09.20.21263509 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/22/2021.09.20.21263509.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/22/2021.09.20.21263509.full AB - Point-of-care assays offer a decentralised and fast solution to the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and provide benefits for patients, healthcare workers, healthcare facilities and other environments. This technology has to potential to prevent outbreaks, enable faster adoption of life-changing measures and improve hospitalar workflow. While reviews regarding the performance of those assays exist, a review focused on the real-life clinical performance and point-of-care feasibility of those platforms was missing. Therefore, the objective of this study is to help end users (clinicians, healthcare providers and organisations) to understand the real-life performance of point-of-care assays, aiding in their implementation in decentralised, true point-of-care facilities, or inside hospitals. 871 studies were screened in 3 major databases and 51 studies were included, evaluating 20 antigen tests and 10 nucleic-acid amplification platforms. We excluded studies that used processed samples, pre-selected populations, archived samples and laboratory-only evaluations and strongly favored prospective trial designs in our inclusion criteria. We also investigated package inserts, instructions for use, comments on published studies and manufacturers websites in order to assess feasibility of POC placement and additional information of relevance to the end user. Apart from sensitivity and specificity, we present information on time to results, hands-on time, kit storage, machine operating conditions and regulatory status. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review to systematically evaluate POC test performance in real-life clinical practice. We found the performance of tests in clinical practice to be markedly different from the manufacturers reported performance and laboratory-only evaluations in the majority of studies. Our findings may help in the decision-making process related to SARS-CoV-2 test in real-life clinical settings.Rationale for the review A review focused on the real-life clinical performance and point-of-care feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic platforms was missing, impairing the ability of individuals, healthcare providers and test providers to make informed decisions on the adoption of such platforms.Objective(s) or question(s) the review addresses The objective of this study is to help clinicians, healthcare providers and organisations to understand the real-life performance of point-of-care assays, aiding in their implementation in decentralised, true point-of-care facilities or in complex hospitalar environments.Competing Interest StatementGHH and AH are employed by Diagnostics of the Real World, who has a molecular assay that was mentioned in this systematic review.Funding StatementThis work has not received external funding from any of the abovementioned affiliations.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:No oversight body was usedAll 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.YesNo special characters