Table 5.

Narrative Summary of Studies Including Patients with a Variety of Respiratory Illnesses; Comparison Group: Multiplex PCR versus No Multiplex PCR Viral Testing

Author, Year (Reference)	Study Design	Setting/Participants	Key Results
Rappo et al., 2016 (27)	Before–after study comparing conventional diagnostics to rapid multiplex viral PCR	337 adults (198 before and 138 after) in the ED and inpatient setting who tested positive for a respiratory virus, no data regarding the number with suspected pneumonia; 45.9% (128 of 279) had radiographic abnormalities on chest images	Among patients with who were positive for noninfluenza viruses, there were no significant differences in hospital LOS or the duration of antimicrobial use when comparing conventional testing with rapid multiplex PCR. Compared with patients with influenza diagnosed with conventional testing, patients with influenza diagnosed by using rapid multiplex PCR had a shorter hospital LOS (−0.37; 95% CI, −0.73 to −0.018; P = 0.04) and duration of antimicrobial use (−0.68; 95% CI, −1.29 to −0.060; P = 0.032).

Definition of abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; ED = emergency department; LOS = length of stay.