search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Cover story - advertising feature


Improving the efficiency of infection control with rapid point-of-care PCR testing


Dr. Christophe Martinaud, Senior Director, Medical Affairs, EMEA, Cepheid, discusses how healthcare providers can improve the efficiency of infection control with rapid point-of-care PCR testing.


Healthcare systems continue to face financial pressures, workforce shortages and increasing patient numbers, making rapid and reliable diagnostics at the point of need a necessity. This article discusses how the emergence of point- of-care (POC) PCR technologies that combine lab-quality testing with simplicity and secure connectivity are making it easier than ever to streamline multiplex testing in emergency settings, helping to reduce turnaround times and improve the flow of patients. Six years on from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, its legacy continues to highlight the need for more effective diagnostic strategies. The recent winter outbreaks have not only been characterised by sustained circulation of respiratory viruses – such as SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B, and RSV – but also by earlier seasonal peaks1


and overlapping outbreaks,


putting considerable strain on resources. Respiratory viruses were not the only pressure in the 2025/6 winter season; norovirus was a significant and disruptive burden on hospitals and community healthcare settings.2 At the same time, the healthcare system is


strained. Real-term growth in health spending has slowed compared with historical averages,3 while expectations around service delivery, preparedness and patient safety stay the same. A huge increase in demand for services means that the national four-hour standard for A&E – previously set at 95 per cent – has not been met nationally since 2014, and 2024 was the first year in which no individual provider achieved this.4 Respiratory problems continue to be common reasons for GP appointments and acute hospital visits, and are growing annually by 13 per cent,5


adding to the already significant pressure. This means that hospitals have likely had to absorb higher patient volumes and seasonal infection surges without proportional increases in resources.


The unpredictability of viral threats The seasonality of respiratory viruses makes them a challenge to healthcare providers, as they often have to deal with sudden influxes of cases. Recent influenza outbreaks have been unpredictable in both timing and severity; in 2025, the winter influenza season arrived almost a month earlier than usual, with case numbers triple that as in the same month in 2024.1 COVID-19 cases and admissions also peaked around the same time, adding further pressure to healthcare services.6


This is particularly


concerning, as comorbidities can further add to the burden of disease, increasing the rates of hospitalisation, length of stay and mortality.7


By contrast, the 2023-


24 season saw uncharacteristically low influenza activity, showing the volatility of respiratory virus patterns.8 This variability makes forward planning increasingly complex for healthcare providers, reinforcing the need for diagnostic systems that can respond quickly and flexibly to sudden shifts in viral circulation. Alongside this, norovirus still poses a significant threat to the


operation of healthcare settings. It is highly contagious and capable of


spreading rapidly through wards, potentially resulting in a high economic burden and operational strain.9


Norovirus reports show that, www.clinicalservicesjournal.com Volume 25 I Issue 4 I April 2026


THE CLINICAL SERVICES JOURNAL


What can we learn from conflict zones?


CBS on ‘the true cost of surgical training’


Shaping the future for better healthcare


between weeks 4 and 5 of 2026, incidence rates in England were 50.6 per cent higher than the five-season average for the same two week period.2


It is thought that a variety of factors


contributed to this, such as the co-circulation of multiple norovirus genotypes, weather conditions, and changes in testing and reporting to the national surveillance programme.2 However, the incidence of norovirus has not been uniformly high throughout the season,2 instead characterised by unpredictable spikes, making planning and resource allocation even more challenging.


Rapid diagnostic testing to strengthen triage and cohorting The continued unpredictability of virus outbreaks highlights the need for fast, accurate and accessible diagnostics. Relying solely on central laboratory testing may introduce delays due to sample transport, batching processes and competing workload pressures. Laboratories already operating at or near capacity may struggle to absorb sudden spikes


in testing requests during winter months. During periods of high demand,


precautionary isolation without confirmation may exacerbate capacity pressures and drive additional costs within urgent and emergency care pathways. The average cost of loss of service and admission for influenza ranges from £1,900-3,700 depending on the length of stay and the age of the patient,10


so early exclusion


of infection has clear clinical and financial implications. The clinical consequences of a delayed or


incorrect diagnosis should form part of the economic assessment when evaluating a POC


April 2026 I www.clinicalservicesjournal.com 7


THE CLINICAL SERVICES JOURNAL


DECONTAMINATION & STERILISATION


INSIDE THIS ISSUE


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84