RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Utilisation of Remote Capillary Blood Testing in an Outpatient Clinic Setting to improve shared decision making and patient and clinician experience: a validation and pilot study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.08.03.20167106
DO 10.1101/2020.08.03.20167106
A1 Lisa Nwankwo
A1 Kate McLaren
A1 Jackie Donovan
A1 Melody Zhifang Ni
A1 Alberto Vidal-Diaz
A1 Michael Loebinger
A1 Anand Shah
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/16/2020.08.03.20167106.abstract
AB Background In a tertiary respiratory centre, large cohorts of patients are managed in an outpatient setting and require blood tests to monitor disease activity and organ toxicity. This requires either visits to tertiary centres for phlebotomy and physician review or utilisation of primary care services.Objectives This study aims to validate remote capillary blood testing in an outpatient setting and analyse impact on clinical pathways.Methods A single-centre prospective cross-sectional validation and parallel observational study was performed. Remote finger prick capillary blood testing was validated compared to local standard venesection using comparative statistical analysis: paired t-test, correlation and Bland-Altman. Capillary was considered interchangeable with venous samples if all 3 criteria were met: non-significant paired t-test (i.e. p>0.05), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) >0.8 and 95% of tests within 10% difference through Bland-Altman (Limits of agreement). In parallel, current clinical pathways including phlebotomy practice was analysed over 4 weeks to review test predictability. A subsequent pilot cohort study analysed potential impact of remote capillary blood sampling on shared decision making and outpatient clinical pathways.Results 117 paired capillary and venous blood samples were prospectively analysed. Interchangeability with venous blood was seen with HbA1c (%), total protein and CRP. Further tests, although not interchangeable, are likely useful to enable longitudinal remote monitoring (e.g. liver function, total IgE, and vitamin D). 65% of outpatient clinic blood tests were predictable with 16% of patients requiring further contact due to actions required. Pilot implementation of remote capillary sampling showed patient and clinician-reported improvement in shared decision-making given contemporaneous blood test results.Conclusions Remote capillary blood sampling can be used accurately for specific tests to monitor chronic disease, and when incorporated into an outpatient clinical pathway can improve shared decision making and patient experience. Further research is required to determine health-economic impact and applicability within telemedicine-based outpatient care.Competing Interest StatementThis work was funded by NHS England Darzi fellowship in Clinical Leadership (KM) and Thriva.co.Funding StatementThis work was funded by NHS England Darzi fellowship in Clinical Leadership (KM) and Thriva.co.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 18/NW/0491)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data referred to in the manuscript is available. Correspond with corresponding author.