

Although analytical performance of POCT platforms is available in manufacturers’ technical documentation, the frequency and nature of errors that may arise when using these platforms in the clinical environment is less commonly reported, and definitions of pre-analytical error are wide-ranging and inconsistently applied. Point of care testing (POCT) has gradually grown in popularity, both in primary care, where it is argued to be a key element of antimicrobial stewardship, and in secondary and tertiary care as new technologies emerge. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS One policies on sharing data and materials. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Ĭompeting interests: The project was supported by a grant from a commercial source (Becton, Dickinson and Company). The project was also supported by a grant from Becton, Dickinson and Company. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.ĭata Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.įunding: This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Community Healthcare MedTech and In Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative at Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust.

Received: OctoAccepted: JanuPublished: February 3, 2020Ĭopyright: © 2020 Fanshawe et al. PLoS ONE 15(2):Įditor: Pal Bela Szecsi, Copenhagen University Hospital Holbæk, DENMARK (2020) Pre-analytical error for three point of care venous blood testing platforms in acute ambulatory settings: A mixed methods service evaluation. Citation: Fanshawe TR, Glogowska M, Edwards G, Turner PJ, Smith I, Steele R, et al.
