ADVERTISEMENT FEATURE
safest decision sometimes defaults to higher acuity settings. Delayed testing, or centralised testing with longer turnaround, increases time to decision and can increase the probability of an acute admission. The NHS England driver and guidance for ARI hubs, recognises that ARI is a major driver of emergency attendance and winter pressure. The guidance sets out models designed to increase assessment capacity and smooth patient journeys across primary, community, and secondary care. Interestingly, the NHSE urgent community care clinical decision- making frameworks for managing acute respiratory illness in the community suggest POCT C-reactive protein (CRP) pathways but does not include the utility of rapid respiratory diagnostics for differentiating pathogen-specific diseases that would inform targeted antivirals or antibiotics. However, the guidelines for integrating in vitro POCT into pathology supported systems and services could encourage adoption but there is a misalignment to disease-specific guidelines. UKHSA influenza guidance is explicit that influenza-like illness is a clinical syndrome and that diagnosis can be challenging when other respiratory viruses co-circulate. That matters most because winter decisions are influenced when symptoms overlap or where diagnostic delay increases risk or inappropriate treatment.
From a clinical performance perspective, time to decision is a high leverage measure. If a patient can receive a timely, validated answer and a safe plan, the system reduces unnecessary escalation. From a patient perspective, time to decision is experienced as clarity, confidence, and continuity, rather than repeated contacts and conflicting advice or treatment.
POINT-OF-CARE TESTING AS A DECISION INFRASTRUCTURE Point-of-care testing only creates value when it functions as a decision infrastructure. In winter, the goal is to reduce uncertainty early enough to change management, isolate early, and improve clinical pathway decisions. That is why ARI resilience is relevant. The published work on ARI hubs describes benefits that come from pathway design, standardised infection management, and separation of cohorts, not from testing alone.
In community urgent care, the key decisions are often discharging home with robust safety netting, and additional support, follow-up, or escalation for acute review. In acute settings, the key decisions include streaming, cohorting, and admission versus discharge with or without treatment or follow-up. Testing needs to sit where a decision changes the disposition, not somewhere that is just technically available.
A LINKED WINTER PATHWAY MODEL ACROSS COMMUNITY AND ACUTE CLINICAL SETTINGS I do not see winter preparedness as a single setting problem; I see it as an architectural interface problem. If community services are left managing uncertainty, without timely diagnostics and clear escalation routes, community care becomes a feeder into the acute front door. This is not theoretical. Community hub models for rapid test-and- treat respiratory pathways is positively represented through regional innovation programmes, with emphasis on real-world evidence to support adoption and consistent implementation. However, if the acute front door is not designed to handle respiratory surges with rapid risk stratification and cohorting, it becomes congested, and the risk increases for everyone. NHS England ARI hubs guidance supports building on existing
28
WWW.PATHOLOGYINPRACTICE.COM June 2026
infrastructure to create models that manage demand in winter and beyond and improve the interface across all clinical settings.
A PRACTICAL LINKED PATHWAY HAS THREE COMPONENTS 1. Community and primary care act as early decision points using standardised assessment, red flag criteria, and aligned escalation thresholds.
2. The acute front door uses a designated respiratory assessment area or flow back into the community, aligned to ARI hub principles, so that likely ARIs can be assessed in a space or place designed for rapid decisions and reduced mixing.
3. A combination of pathology, microbiology and virology supported governance. The value is not case-by-case approval, it is defining testing policies, interpretation and record standards, and escalation thresholds that remain consistent during co-circulation of disease and operational pressure. UKHSA antiviral guidance also emphasises that clinicians should use national recommendations alongside specialist advice and local infection pathways, which fits well with a governance supported oversight model.
TURNING RESULTS INTO ACTION IN INFLUENZA SEASON A result matters only if it changes what happens next which positively impacts patient outcomes. UKHSA provides national guidance on antiviral treatment and prophylaxis for seasonal influenza, with annually updated recommendations and an explicit recognition that clinical diagnosis can be challenging when other viruses co-circulate. This is why rapid confirmation of a disease can be valuable when embedded within a defined clinical management or diagnostic pathway when combined with clinical judgement or infectious disease specialist advice. Rapid diagnostics support timely treatment decisions for eligible cohorts and reduce unnecessary treatment plans, such as cautionary antibiotics in the presence of influenza-like symptoms or prevent antibiotic prescriptions with delayed dispensing in a more likely probability of viral pathogen causes for acute sore throat presentations. It can also support infection prevention and control decisions, especially when ARIs continue to drive demand across the systems. All while supporting patient trust in decision-making, preventing them seeking additional opinions in A&E. In urgent and primary care, this translates into validated management and discharge decisions when safe to do so, and earlier escalation when there are signs of decline or deterioration. The operational benefit is fewer precautionary referrals. The clinical benefit is a decision that is robustly quantified, transparent, and more consistent. The patient benefit is a plan that is clearer, with focused safety netting and appropriate treatment delivered sooner.
WHY EMBEDDING POINT-OF-CARE TESTING IS CHALLENGING IN COMMUNITY CARE In my experience, funding remains a primary barrier, often due to misalignment between commissioning scope, provider readiness, and access to time-limited funding mechanisms.
Programmes fail in delivery less often because of analytical performance but more often because the system does not resolve the key practical issues: ownership, workforce, estates, digital integration, and governance; but moreover, a lack of agile funding and re- distribution.
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
