Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jahn, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Van Aken, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jahn, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Van Aken, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2003, Vol. 90, No. 4 425-427
© 2003 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Editorial I

Near-patient testing—point-of-care or point of costs and convenience?

U. R. Jahn1 and H. Van Aken1

1 Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Münster University Hospital, D-48149 Münster, Germany, E-mail: jahn@anit.uni-muenster.de

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The development of the first portable blood glucose monitors introduced an epoch-making new concept into clinical medicine.1 The ability to measure laboratory variables in acute situations near the patient was an appealing way to improve clinical efficiency and patient care. A new trend began, reversing an earlier tendency towards centralization that had begun in hospitals during the 1960s in the course of modernization, rationalization, and the introduction of automation processes.2 This fundamental shift in diagnostic testing was accompanied by significant advances in technology, with miniaturization of analysers and a remarkable increase in the numbers of different diagnostic and analytic tests available.3

 Near-patient testing, ancillary testing, bedside testing, alternative-site testing, decentralized testing, out-of-laboratory testing, and most commonly point-of-care testing, are synonymous terms meaning that analytical testing of patient specimens can be performed at or near the location of patient care.4 Near-patient testing does not mean providing a wide variety of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Clinical and organizational advantages

Disadvantages and risks of near-patient testing

Patient benefit, cost–benefit ratio, and economic considerations
Conclusion and recommendations for the implementation of near-patient testing


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care PainHome page
A. N. Curry and J. T. Pierce
Conventional and near-patient tests of coagulation
CEACCP, April 1, 2007; 7(2): 45 - 50.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
O. Sanehi, U. R. Jahn, and H. Van Aken
Near-patient testing
Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2003; 91(4): 608 - 608.
[Full Text] [PDF]