Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T08:12:22.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cost Implications of Duplicative Influenza Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing During the 2013–2014 Influenza Season: The Price of Certainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Burke A. Cunha ,
James Connolly ,
Daniel Talmasov  and
Muhammed Raza
Burke A. Cunha*
Affiliation:
Infectious Disease Division, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, New York; and State University of New York, School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York
James Connolly
Affiliation:
Infectious Disease Division, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, New York; and State University of New York, School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York
Daniel Talmasov
Affiliation:
Infectious Disease Division, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, New York; and State University of New York, School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York
Muhammed Raza
Affiliation:
Infectious Disease Division, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, New York; and State University of New York, School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York
*
MACP, Infectious Disease Division, Winthrop-University Hospital, 222 Station Plaza North, Suite 432, Mineola, NY 11501 (bacunha@winthrop.org).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letter to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 35 , Issue 10 , October 2014 , pp. 1317 - 1319
Copyright
© 2014 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

References

1. Arriola, CS, Brammer, L, Epperson, S, et al. Update: influenza activity—United States, September 29, 2013–February 8, 2014. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2014;63:148–153.Google Scholar
2. Harada, D, Nishiuchi, R, Iwasaki, Y, et al. Reliability of a rapid test for the clinical diagnosis of influenza A/H1N1 2009. Scand J Infect Dis 2012;44:776–781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Tanei, M, Yokokawa, H, Murai, K, et al. Factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy of the rapid influenza antigen detection test (RIADT): a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2014;4:e003885.Google Scholar
4. Peterson, S, Dugas, AF, Rothman, RE. Evaluation of 11 commercially available rapid influenza diagnostic tests—United States, 2011–2012. Ann Emerg Med 2013;61:573–577.Google Scholar
5. Loeffelholz, MJ, Pong, DL, Pyles, RB, et al. Comparison of the FilmArray Respiratory Panel and Prodesse real-time PCR assays for detection of respiratory pathogens. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:4083–4088.Google Scholar
6. Novak-Weekley, SM, Marlowe, EM, Poulter, M, et al. Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Flu Assay for rapid identification and differentiation of influenza A, influenza A 2009 H1N1, and influenza B viruses. J Clin Microbiol 2012;50:1704–1710.Google Scholar
7. Popowitch, EB, Rogers, E, Miller, MB. Retrospective and prospective verification of the Cepheid Xpert influenza virus assay. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:3368–3369.Google Scholar
8. Vallieres, E, Renaud, C. Clinical and economical impact of multiplex respiratory virus assays. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2013;76:255–261.Google Scholar