Routine use of point-of-care tests: usefulness and application in clinical microbiology.

Point-of-care (POC) tests offer potentially substantial benefits for the management of infectious diseases, mainly by shortening the time to result and by making the test available at the bedside or at remote care centres. Commercial POC tests are already widely available for the diagnosis of bacterial and viral infections and for parasitic diseases, including malaria. Infectious diseases specialists and clinical microbiologists should be aware of the indications and limitations of each rapid test, so that they can use them appropriately and correctly interpret their results. The clinical applications and performance of the most relevant and commonly used POC tests are reviewed. Some of these tests exhibit insufficient sensitivity, and should therefore be coupled to confirmatory tests when the results are negative (e.g. Streptococcus pyogenes rapid antigen detection test), whereas the results of others need to be confirmed when positive (e.g. malaria). New molecular-based tests exhibit better sensitivity and specificity than former immunochromatographic assays (e.g. Streptococcus agalactiae detection). In the coming years, further evolution of POC tests may lead to new diagnostic approaches, such as panel testing, targeting not just a single pathogen, but all possible agents suspected in a specific clinical setting. To reach this goal, the development of serology-based and/or molecular-based microarrays/multiplexed tests will be needed. The availability of modern technology and new microfluidic devices will provide clinical microbiologists with the opportunity to be back at the bedside, proposing a large variety of POC tests that will allow quicker diagnosis and improved patient care.

Adult native septic arthritis: a review of 10 years of experience and lessons for empirical antibiotic therapy.

Objectives To review the epidemiology of native septic arthritis to establish local guidelines for empirical antibiotic therapy as part of an antibiotic stewardship programme. Methods We conducted a 10 year retrospective study based on positive synovial fluid cultures and discharge diagnosis of septic arthritis in adult patients. Microbiology results and medical records were reviewed. Results Between 1999 and 2008, we identified 233 episodes of septic arthritis. The predominant causative pathogens were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and streptococci (respectively, 44.6% and 14.2% of cases). Only 11 cases (4.7%) of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) arthritis were diagnosed, among which 5 (45.5%) occurred in known carriers. For large-joint infections, amoxicillin/clavulanate or cefuroxime would have been appropriate in 84.5% of cases. MRSA and Mycobacterium tuberculosis would have been the most frequent pathogens that would not have been covered. In contrast, amoxicillin/clavulanate would have been appropriate for only 75.3% of small-joint infections (82.6% if diabetics are excluded). MRSA and Pseudomonas aeruginosa would have been the main pathogens not covered. Piperacillin/tazobactam would have been appropriate in 93.8% of cases (P < 0.01 versus amoxicillin/clavulanate). This statistically significant advantage is lost after exclusion of diabetics (P = 0.19). Conclusions Amoxicillin/clavulanate or cefuroxime would be adequate for empirical coverage of large-joint septic arthritis in our area. A broad-spectrum antibiotic would be significantly superior for small-joint infections in diabetics. Systematic coverage of MRSA is not justified, but should be considered for known carriers. These recommendations are applicable to our local setting. They might also apply to hospitals sharing the same epidemiology.