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
. 2017 Apr 19;12(4):e0174504.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174504. eCollection 2017.

The impact of a point-of-care testing device on CVD risk assessment completion in New Zealand primary-care practice: A cluster randomised controlled trial and qualitative investigation

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The impact of a point-of-care testing device on CVD risk assessment completion in New Zealand primary-care practice: A cluster randomised controlled trial and qualitative investigation

Sue Wells et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the effect of a point of care (POC) device for testing lipids and HbA1c in addition to testing by community laboratory facilities (usual practice) on the completion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessments in general practice.

Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial in 20 New Zealand general practices stratified by size and rurality and randomised to POC device plus usual practice or usual practice alone (controls). Patients aged 35-79 years were eligible if they met national guideline criteria for CVD risk assessment. Data on CVD risk assessments were aggregated using a web-based decision support programme common to each practice. Data entered into the on-line CVD risk assessment form could be saved pending blood test results. The primary outcome was the proportion of completed CVD risk assessments. Qualitative data on practice processes for CVD risk assessment and feasibility of POC testing were collected at the end of the study by interviews and questionnaire. The POC testing was supported by a comprehensive quality assurance programme.

Results: A CVD risk assessment entry was recorded for 7421 patients in 10 POC practices and 6217 patients in 10 control practices; 99.5% of CVD risk assessments had complete data in both groups (adjusted odds ratio 1.02 [95%CI 0.61-1.69]). There were major external influences that affected the trial: including a national performance target for CVD risk assessment and changes to CVD guidelines. All practices had invested in systems and dedicated staff time to identify and follow up patients to completion. However, the POC device was viewed by most as an additional tool rather than as an opportunity to review practice work flow and leverage the immediate test results for patient education and CVD risk management discussions. Shortly after commencement, the trial was halted due to a change in the HbA1c test assay performance. The trial restarted after the manufacturing issue was rectified but this affected the end use of the device.

Conclusions: Performance incentives and external influences were more powerful modifiers of practice behaviours than the POC device in relation to CVD risk assessment completion. The promise of combining risk assessment, communication and management within one consultation was not realised. With shifts in policy focus, the utility of POC devices for patient engagement in CVD preventive care may be demonstrated if fully integrated into the clinical setting.

Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000607774.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: SW was the recipient of a Stevenson Fellowship in Health Innovation and Quality Improvement. This sponsor had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. NR was the recipient of a National Heart Foundation of New Zealand Research Fellowship. This sponsor had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. GH has received travel grants and accommodation to attend Roche Diagnostics Point-of-Care Testing User Group meetings in New Zealand. GH has a relationship with PHARMAC as part of his role in providing advice and expertise on the evaluation and laboratory validation of glucose meters. GH is a member of the New Zealand Point-of-Care Testing Advisory Group which developed the New Zealand Best Practice Guidelines for Point-of-Care Testing 2014. GH is currently writing two chapters for a textbook on Point-of-Care Testing under the editorship of Professor Mark Shephard of Flinders University in South Australia. The book was due to be published in 2016. Otherwise all other authors have declared that no competing interest exist. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Consort diagram of participation.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ministry of Health (2013) Health Loss in New Zealand: A report from the New Zealand Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors Study 2006–2016. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
    1. Ministry of Health (2014) Mortality and Demographic Data 2011. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
    1. Chan WC, Wright C, Riddell T, Wells S, Kerr A, Gala G et al. (2008) Ethnic and socio-economic disparities in the prevalence of cardiovascular disease in New Zealand. New Zealand Medical Journal 121: 3341. - PubMed
    1. Ministry of Health (2014) New Zealand Health Survey: Annual update of key results 2013/14. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
    1. Ministry of Health (2014) Health targets: More heart and diabetes checks. Wellington: Ministry of Health.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources