What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to assess patient and clinician attitudes towards point-of-care testing for lithium and to analytically validate a novel POCT device against a reference method.

June 28, 2026Open Access

Acceptability and accuracy of point-of-care monitoring of lithium levels

Puntos clave

The study aims to assess patient and clinician attitudes towards point-of-care testing for lithium and to analytically validate a novel POCT device against a reference method.
Conducted surveys to gather patient and clinician attitudes on lithium monitoring and treatment.
Performed analytical validation of the Medimate Multireader device comparing it with a reference laboratory method.
Assessed accuracy, bias, agreement, and reproducibility in the device's performance.
Most respondents preferred point-of-care testing to traditional venous sampling.
The Medimate Multireader showed high analytical agreement with a correlation coefficient of 0.96 and mean bias within ±0.2 mmol/L.
Participants believed home-based POCT would increase their willingness to take lithium.

Resumen

BACKGROUND: Lithium is the gold-standard treatment for bipolar disorder, yet its use is often restricted by the logistical burden of regular venous blood sampling and laboratory monitoring. Point-of-care testing (POCT) offers a potential alternative, but evidence regarding acceptability and analytical performance is limited. AIMS: To evaluate patient and clinician attitudes towards POCT for lithium monitoring and analytically validate a novel POCT device (Medimate Multireader) against a reference laboratory method. METHOD: We combined patient and clinician surveys on attitudes towards lithium treatment and monitoring with an analytical evaluation of the Medimate Multireader, a novel POCT device. Survey data explored perceived barriers to lithium use and preferences for monitoring methods. Analytical validation assessed accuracy, bias, agreement and reproducibility compared with a reference laboratory method. RESULTS: Most patients and clinicians preferred POCT to conventional venous sampling. Many patients described venous monitoring as inconvenient and disruptive and indicated that they would be more willing to take lithium if home-based POCT were available. Clinicians identified the frequency and logistical demands of venous blood testing as the principal barrier to prescribing lithium. The Medimate Multireader demonstrated excellent analytical agreement with the reference method, with a correlation coefficient of 0.96 and mean bias and limits of agreement within the predefined ±0.2 mmol/L performance specification. The potential of the device for patient-operated home-based testing was viewed favourably by survey respondents. CONCLUSIONS: POCT for lithium provides a feasible and analytically robust alternative to venous blood monitoring. By reducing the logistical burden of regular venous sampling, a key barrier to lithium use, POCT aligns with National Health Service priorities for digitally enabled community-based care and may support improved access, safety and adherence.

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo

Cite This Study

Atkins et al. (Fri,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a40bb4561bb0a67205c6d18 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2026.10695

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo