Executive summary. The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory Medicine Practice Guideline: Evidence-based practice for point-of-care testing
Abstract
Background Point-of-care testing (POCT) is clinical laboratory testing conducted close to the site of patient care. POCT has the potential to provide faster test results and therapeutic intervention with improved patient outcomes. However, when over-utilized or used inappropriately POCT results can be misleading and increase healthcare costs. Methods The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry developed evidence-based Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for POCT. Results These Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines systematically review the scientific literature relating POCT to clinical outcomes and offer recommendations to improve the clinical utility of POCT. Conclusions These guidelines will be useful to clinicians considering the addition of POCT, to those that question current practices in POCT, and to clinicians seeking evidence-based support for POCT in clinical management. These guidelines represent the most comprehensive systematic review of the POCT literature to date and will help define future research that is needed to add to our current POCT knowledge base.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
POCT is an increasingly popular means of conducting laboratory testing closer to the site of patient care.
“Point-of-care testing (POCT) is becoming an increasingly popular way to perform laboratory tests closer to the patient.”
From Point-of-care testing: state-of-the art and perspectives (2025) · cites this paper as [5]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Florkowski, C., Don-Wauchope, A., Gimenez, N., Rodriguez-Capote, K., Wils, J., & Zemlin, A. (2017) · Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences · doi:10.1080/10408363.2017.1399336 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Point-of-care testing: state-of-the art and perspectives
Plebani, M., Nichols, J. H., Luppa, P. B., Greene, D., Sciacovelli, L., Shaw, J., Khan, A. I., Carraro, P., Freckmann, G., Dimech, W., et al. (2025) · Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · doi:10.1515/cclm-2024-0675 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Self-citationKim, Y., Park, S., Kim, M.-H., Song, S. H., Lee, W. M., Kim, H. S., Jin, K., Han, S., Kim, Y. C., Han, S. S., et al. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0227694 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
HbA1c-testing: Evaluation of two point-of-care analysers
Dubach, I. L., Christ, E. R., & Diem, P. (2019) · Primary Care Diabetes · doi:10.1016/j.pcd.2019.05.007 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Evaluation of a HbA1c point-of-care analyzer
Menéndez-Valladares, P., Fernández-Riejos, P., Sánchez-Mora, C., Pérez-Pérez, A., Sánchez-Margalet, V., & González-Rodríguez, C. (2015) · Clinical Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2015.03.016 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nichols, J. H., Christenson, R. H., Clarke, W., Gronowski, A., Hammett-Stabler, C. A., Jacobs, E., Kazmierczak, S., Lewandrowski, K., Price, C., Sacks, D. B., Sautter, R. L., Shipp, G., Sokoll, L., Watson, I. D., Winter, W., & Zucker, M. L.
- Affiliations
- Baystate Health (US)
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- New York State Department of Health (US)
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Carolinas Medical Center (US)
- Aintree University Hospital (GB)
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nichols, James H.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Clinica Chimica Acta
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 379
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 14-28
- ISSN
- 0009-8981 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2026403469
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 8.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinica Chimica Acta (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- point-of-care testing, evidence-based practice, clinical outcomes, health care costs, clinical management
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Point-of-Care Systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
