Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Sep;31(9):714-9.
doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013-202632. Epub 2013 Jun 7.

Impact from point-of-care devices on emergency department patient processing times compared with central laboratory testing of blood samples: a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Impact from point-of-care devices on emergency department patient processing times compared with central laboratory testing of blood samples: a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

Stephen Edward Asha et al. Emerg Med J. 2014 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To determine if time to disposition decisions for emergency department (ED) patients can be reduced when blood tests are processed using point-of-care (POC) devices and to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of POC compared with laboratory testing.

Methods: This randomised trial enrolled adults suspected of an acute coronary syndrome or presenting with conditions considered to only require blood tests available by POC. Participants were randomised to have blood tests processed by POC or laboratory. Outcomes measured were time to disposition decision and ED length-of-stay (LOS). The cost-effectiveness analysis calculated the total and mean costs per ED presentation, as well as total and mean benefits in time saved to disposition decision.

Results: There were 410 POC participants and 401 controls. The mean times to a disposition decision for POC versus controls were 3.24 and 3.50 h respectively, a difference of 7.6% (95% CI 0.4% to 14.3%, p=0.04), and 4.32 and 4.52 h respectively for ED LOS, a difference of 4.4% (95% CI -2.7% to 11.0%, p=0.21). Improved processing time was greatest for participants enrolled by senior staff with a reduction in time to disposition decision of 19.1% (95% CI 7.3% to 29.4%, p<0.01) and ED LOS of 15.6% (95% CI 4.9% to 25.2%, p=0.01). Mean pathology costs were $12 higher in the POC group (95% CI $7 to $18) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $113 per hour saved in time to disposition decision for POC compared with standard laboratory testing.

Conclusions: Small improvements in disposition decision time were achieved with POC testing for a moderate increase in cost. Greatest benefit may be achieved when POC is targeted to senior medical staff.

Keywords: cost effectiveness; diagnosis; emergency care systems, efficiency.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources