Perceptions on Point-of-Care Tests for Sexually Transmitted Infections - Comparison between Frontline Clinicians and Professionals in Industry.

Q3 Nursing
Yu-Hsiang Hsieh, Charlotte A Gaydos, M Terry Hogan, Joany Jackman, Mary Jett-Goheen, O Manuel Uy, Anne M Rompalo
{"title":"Perceptions on Point-of-Care Tests for Sexually Transmitted Infections - Comparison between Frontline Clinicians and Professionals in Industry.","authors":"Yu-Hsiang Hsieh,&nbsp;Charlotte A Gaydos,&nbsp;M Terry Hogan,&nbsp;Joany Jackman,&nbsp;Mary Jett-Goheen,&nbsp;O Manuel Uy,&nbsp;Anne M Rompalo","doi":"10.1097/POC.0b013e31825a25e8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>OBJECTIVES: To determine if a gap exists between sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinicians and industry professionals regarding perceptions of the ideal types and characteristics of STI point-of-care tests (POCTs). METHODS: Our online survey design contained sections on demographics; barriers of use for available STI POCTs; characteristics of an ideal POCT, including prioritizing pathogens for targets; and \"building your own POCT\". Practicing clinicians and academic experts from two venues, STI-related international conference attendees and U.S. STD clinic clinicians, were invited to participate in the clinician survey. Professionals from industry in the STI diagnostic field were invited to participate in the industry survey. Chi-square test and conditional logistical regression were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Clinician survey participants (n=218) identified \"the time frame required\" (39.9%), \"complexity\" (31.2%), and \"interruption of work flow\" (30.3%) as the top three barriers making it difficult to use STI POCTs, while the industry survey participants (n=107) identified \"complexity\" (65.4%), \"unreliability\" (53.3%), and \"difficulty in reading results\" (34.6%) as the top three barriers (all p values <0.05). Sensitivity was always the most important attribute to be considered for a new STI POCT by both participant groups. Participants of the clinician group chose cost as the second priority attribute, while those of the industry group chose specificity as the second priority. CONCLUSION: We identified differences in the perceptions regarding barriers and ideal attributes for STI POCTs between frontline clinical providers and industry personnel. Tailored training is warranted to inform scientists, biomedical engineers, and other industry experts about characteristics that clinicians desire for STI POCTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":44085,"journal":{"name":"Point of Care","volume":"11 2","pages":"126-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/POC.0b013e31825a25e8","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Point of Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/POC.0b013e31825a25e8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a gap exists between sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinicians and industry professionals regarding perceptions of the ideal types and characteristics of STI point-of-care tests (POCTs). METHODS: Our online survey design contained sections on demographics; barriers of use for available STI POCTs; characteristics of an ideal POCT, including prioritizing pathogens for targets; and "building your own POCT". Practicing clinicians and academic experts from two venues, STI-related international conference attendees and U.S. STD clinic clinicians, were invited to participate in the clinician survey. Professionals from industry in the STI diagnostic field were invited to participate in the industry survey. Chi-square test and conditional logistical regression were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Clinician survey participants (n=218) identified "the time frame required" (39.9%), "complexity" (31.2%), and "interruption of work flow" (30.3%) as the top three barriers making it difficult to use STI POCTs, while the industry survey participants (n=107) identified "complexity" (65.4%), "unreliability" (53.3%), and "difficulty in reading results" (34.6%) as the top three barriers (all p values <0.05). Sensitivity was always the most important attribute to be considered for a new STI POCT by both participant groups. Participants of the clinician group chose cost as the second priority attribute, while those of the industry group chose specificity as the second priority. CONCLUSION: We identified differences in the perceptions regarding barriers and ideal attributes for STI POCTs between frontline clinical providers and industry personnel. Tailored training is warranted to inform scientists, biomedical engineers, and other industry experts about characteristics that clinicians desire for STI POCTs.

对性传播感染即时检测的认知——一线临床医生与行业专业人员的比较
目的:确定性传播感染(STI)临床医生和行业专业人员之间是否存在关于性传播感染(STI)护理点检测(POCTs)的理想类型和特征的认知差距。方法:我们的在线调查设计包含人口统计学部分;现有性传播感染poct的使用障碍;理想POCT的特征,包括对目标病原体的优先排序;和“建立你自己的POCT”。来自性传播疾病相关国际会议与会者和美国性传播疾病临床医生两个地点的临床医生和学术专家被邀请参加临床医生调查。来自STI诊断领域的业内专业人士被邀请参加行业调查。数据分析采用卡方检验和条件逻辑回归。结果:临床医生调查参与者(n=218)认为“所需时间框架”(39.9%)、“复杂性”(31.2%)和“工作流程中断”(30.3%)是难以使用STI poct的前三大障碍,而行业调查参与者(n=107)认为“复杂性”(65.4%)、“不可靠性”(53.3%)和“难以阅读结果”(34.6%)是前三大障碍(均为p值)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Point of Care
Point of Care MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Point of Care: The Journal of Near-Patient Testing & Technology is a vital resource for directors and managers of large and small hospital pathology labs, blood centers, home health-care agencies, doctors" offices, and other healthcare facilities. Each issue brings you peer-reviewed original research articles, along with concepts, technologies and trends, covering topics that include: Test accuracy Turnaround time Data management Quality control Regulatory compliance Cost-effectiveness of testing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信