Evidence Hub

Clinical Outcomes of Rapid Respiratory Virus Testing in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Schober T, Wong K, DeLisle G, Caya C, Brendish NJ, Clark TW, Dendukuri N, Doan Q et al.

JAMA internal medicine, 2024

6,068 participants · 51 citations

Abstract

Importance

Rapid tests for respiratory viruses, including multiplex panels, are increasingly available in emergency departments (EDs). Their association with patient outcomes remains unclear.

Objective

To determine if ED rapid respiratory virus testing in patients with suspected acute respiratory infection (ARI) was associated with decreased antibiotic use, ancillary tests, ED length of stay, and ED return visits and hospitalization and increased influenza antiviral treatment.

Data Sources

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase (Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science from 1985 to November 14, 2022.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials of patients of any age with ARI in an ED. The primary intervention was rapid viral testing.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines were followed. Two independent reviewers (T.S. and K.W.) extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias, version 2.0. Estimates were pooled using random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Antibiotic use and secondary outcomes were pooled separately as risk ratios (RRs) and risk difference estimates with 95% CIs.

Results

Of 7157 studies identified, 11 (0.2%; n = 6068 patients) were included in pooled analyses. Routine rapid viral testing was not associated with antibiotic use (RR, 0.99; 95% CI,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,068 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free