The Library
Multiplex tests to identify gastrointestinal bacteria, viruses and parasites in people with suspected infectious gastroenteritis : a systematic review and economic analysis
Tools
Tools
Tools
Freeman, Karoline, Mistry, Hema, Tsertsvadze, Alexander, Royle, Pamela, McCarthy, Noel D., Taylor-Phillips, Sian, Manuel, Rohini and Mason, James (2017) Multiplex tests to identify gastrointestinal bacteria, viruses and parasites in people with suspected infectious gastroenteritis : a systematic review and economic analysis. Health Technology Assessment, 21 (23). pp. 1-188. doi:10.3310/hta21230
|
PDF
WRAP-multiplex-tests-gastronintestinal-people-review-Freeman-2017.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Download (5Mb) | Preview |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3310/hta21230
Abstract
Background
Gastroenteritis is a common, transient disorder usually caused by infection and characterised by the acute onset of diarrhoea. Multiplex gastrointestinal pathogen panel (GPP) tests simultaneously identify common bacterial, viral and parasitic pathogens using molecular testing. By providing test results more rapidly than conventional testing methods, GPP tests might positively influence the treatment and management of patients presenting in hospital or in the community.
Objective
To systematically review the evidence for GPP tests [xTAG® (Luminex, Toronto, ON, Canada), FilmArray (BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) and Faecal Pathogens B (AusDiagnostics, Beaconsfield, NSW, Australia)] and to develop a de novo economic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of GPP tests with conventional testing in England and Wales.
Data sources
Multiple electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database were searched from inception to January 2016 (with supplementary searches of other online resources).
Review methods
Eligible studies included patients with acute diarrhoea; comparing GPP tests with standard microbiology techniques; and patient, management, test accuracy or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Quality assessment of eligible studies used tailored Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2, Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Philips checklists. The meta-analysis included positive and negative agreement estimated for each pathogen. A de novo decision tree model compared patients managed with GPP testing or comparable coverage with patients managed using conventional tests, within the Public Health England pathway. Economic models included hospital and community management of patients with suspected gastroenteritis. The model estimated costs (in 2014/15 prices) and quality-adjusted life-year losses from a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective.
Results
Twenty-three studies informed the review of clinical evidence (17 xTAG, four FilmArray, two xTAG and FilmArray, 0 Faecal Pathogens B). No study provided an adequate reference standard with which to compare the test accuracy of GPP with conventional tests. A meta-analysis (of 10 studies) found considerable heterogeneity; however, GPP testing produces a greater number of pathogen-positive findings than conventional testing. It is unclear whether or not these additional ‘positives’ are clinically important. The review identified no robust evidence to inform consequent clinical management of patients. There is considerable uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of GPP panels used to test for suspected infectious gastroenteritis in hospital and community settings. Uncertainties in the model include length of stay, assumptions about false-positive findings and the costs of tests. Although there is potential for cost-effectiveness in both settings, key modelling assumptions need to be verified and model findings remain tentative.
Limitations
No test–treat trials were retrieved. The economic model reflects one pattern of care, which will vary across the NHS.
Conclusions
The systematic review and cost-effectiveness model identify uncertainties about the adoption of GPP tests within the NHS. GPP testing will generally correctly identify pathogens identified by conventional testing; however, these tests also generate considerable additional positive results of uncertain clinical importance.
| Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjects: | R Medicine > RC Internal medicine | ||||
| Divisions: | Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School | ||||
| Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): | Gastroenteritis -- Microbiology , Gastroenteritis -- Parasites , Gastroenteritis -- Treatment -- Cost effectiveness | ||||
| Journal or Publication Title: | Health Technology Assessment | ||||
| Publisher: | NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme | ||||
| ISSN: | 1366-5278 | ||||
| Official Date: | May 2017 | ||||
| Dates: |
|
||||
| Date of first compliant deposit: | 19 June 2017 | ||||
| Volume: | 21 | ||||
| Number: | 23 | ||||
| Page Range: | pp. 1-188 | ||||
| DOI: | 10.3310/hta21230 | ||||
| Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||
| Publication Status: | Published | ||||
| Access rights to Published version: | Restricted or Subscription Access | ||||
| Funder: | National Institute for Health Research (Great Britain). Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR TAP) |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
