Related Experiment Videos
More laboratory testing: greater cost but not necessarily better
1Swedish American Hospital, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford, 61104, USA.
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
|April 27, 2000
Summary
Bacterial antigen latex agglutination tests show low sensitivity and specificity, leading to significant costs and unnecessary treatments. This study questions the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of this diagnostic assay.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Microbiology
- Diagnostic Assay Evaluation
- Pediatric Infectious Diseases
Background:
- Bacterial latex agglutination assay is commonly used for pediatric patients to screen for bacterial antigens in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and urine.
- Concerns regarding the assay's accuracy and high cost prompted a review of its clinical utility.
- Previous literature has raised questions about the reliability of bacterial antigen testing.
Purpose of the Study:
- To retrospectively evaluate the accuracy, clinical impact, and cost-effectiveness of the bacterial latex agglutination assay.
- To assess the sensitivity and specificity of the assay in urine and CSF specimens.
- To determine if the assay influences patient treatment or hospital course.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 6,370 bacterial latex agglutination tests performed between May 1995 and November 1996.
- Analysis of patient charts to correlate test results with clinical outcomes.
- Evaluation of assay sensitivity, specificity, false positive, and false negative rates.
Main Results:
- Sensitivity and specificity were 28.6% and 86.7% for urine, and 70.0% and 99.4% for CSF.
- The assay generated 13 false negatives and 59 false positives.
- Annual billed costs averaged $167,000, excluding indirect costs from unnecessary treatments and prolonged hospital stays.
Conclusions:
- Bacterial antigen latex agglutination testing lacks sufficient sensitivity and specificity for reliable screening.
- Accurate results showed no clinical impact, while inaccurate results led to unnecessary patient management and significant costs.
- The continued use of this assay should be reconsidered due to its questionable clinical efficiency and high financial burden.