Testing Services Offered

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is a molecular diagnostic technique used to detect specific genetic material from pathogens. In the context of antibiotic resistance, PCR identifies the presence of resistance genes within bacterial DNA that indicate a microorganism’s ability to survive treatment with certain antibiotics.

These resistance genes include well-known markers such as:

• mecA for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)
   
• blaKPC, blaNDM, and blaOXA-48 for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE)
   
• vanA/vanB for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE)
   

PCR testing delivers results rapidly, often within a few hours, enabling faster clinical decisions compared to traditional culture-based methods that can take 48–72 hours.

PCR-based resistance testing is a powerful tool in supporting antimicrobial stewardship initiatives:

1. Rapid Identification of Resistance
   PCR detects resistance genes quickly, allowing clinicians to avoid or discontinue ineffective antibiotics and start targeted therapy sooner.
    
2. Improved Antibiotic Selection
   By knowing which resistance genes are present, physicians can choose antibiotics that are more likely to be effective, reducing the use of broad-spectrum drugs.
    
3. Reduced Unnecessary Antibiotic Use
   Early molecular insights prevent the prolonged use of empiric antibiotics when resistance is not detected, decreasing selective pressure that drives resistance.
    
4. Enhanced Infection Control
   Quick identification of patients carrying multidrug-resistant organisms (e.g., MRSA, CRE) enables timely implementation of isolation and containment measures.
    
5. Support for Surveillance and Reporting
   PCR results contribute to data on local resistance patterns, supporting formulary decisions, public health reporting, and continuous improvement in prescribing practices.

Conducting a combined COVID and flu test offers several advantages and benefits that make it a valuable diagnostic tool. Here's a description of why testing for both COVID-19 and the flu simultaneously is advantageous:

1. Comprehensive Assessment: Testing for both COVID-19 and flu in a single test allows for a comprehensive assessment of respiratory illnesses. Since the symptoms of COVID-19 and the flu can overlap, a combined test provides a more accurate and efficient diagnosis by ruling out one or both conditions. This helps healthcare providers make informed decisions regarding patient care and appropriate treatment strategies.
2. Time and Resource Efficiency: Administering a single test for both COVID-19 and flu saves valuable time and resources compared to conducting separate tests for each condition. It streamlines the testing process, reduces the need for multiple sample collections, and minimizes the burden on patients and healthcare systems. This efficiency is especially crucial during flu season or in situations where COVID-19 and flu cases coexist.
3. Differentiating Viral Infections: By testing for both COVID-19 and flu simultaneously, healthcare professionals can distinguish between the two viral infections more accurately. This differentiation is important for epidemiological surveillance, tracking the prevalence of each virus, and implementing appropriate public health measures.
4. Preventing Transmission: Identifying individuals infected with both COVID-19 and flu helps in implementing timely isolation and quarantine measures. It aids in preventing the further spread of both viruses, protecting vulnerable populations, and reducing the strain on healthcare resources.
5. Enhanced Patient Management: Diagnosing both COVID-19 and flu concurrently allows for better patient management. It helps healthcare providers determine the most appropriate treatment options, initiate appropriate isolation measures, and provide targeted care to minimize the risk of complications and promote a speedy recovery.

In summary, conducting a combined COVID and flu test offers a more comprehensive assessment, improves efficiency, aids in differentiating viral infections, prevents transmission, and enhances patient management. By considering both infections simultaneously, healthcare providers can make well-informed decisions and deliver optimal care to their patients.

Conventional laboratory diagnosis of onychomycosis has often relied on limited techniques, such as direct microscopic examination using potassium hydroxide (KOH) preparation. However, this approach has significant drawbacks as it fails to identify the specific genus, species, or pathogen responsible for the fungal infection. Additionally, it lacks the ability to differentiate between yeasts and molds. Consequently, false negative results are common, leading to inappropriate care or a lack of treatment, particularly in high-risk individuals, where a negative result does not rule out fungal infection.

The limitations of conventional diagnostic methods are evident in their lack of specificity, sensitivity, and time to diagnosis. Even when fungal cultures are attempted, failure to isolate the pathogen occurs in a substantial percentage of cases, and the process takes several weeks. Furthermore, histopathological testing, such as periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) staining, improves sensitivity by detecting the presence or absence of fungal elements but does not identify the specific organism.

Fortunately, the emergence of molecular technology, particularly the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, has revolutionized the field of onychomycosis diagnosis. PCR testing, a highly sensitive and specific method, allows for the detection of various microorganisms, including fungal pathogens. In the case of onychomycosis, PCR testing amplifies specific DNA sequences of dermatophyte fungus, providing rapid and accurate identification.

The advantages of PCR testing over conventional methods are multifold. Firstly, PCR testing significantly improves sensitivity, enabling the detection of causative fungi in nail specimens from patients suspected of having onychomycosis. Secondly, PCR testing offers remarkable speed, delivering results within 24 hours, compared to the days or weeks required by traditional techniques. This expedited diagnosis facilitates prompt initiation of appropriate treatment, leading to improved patient outcomes.

The enhanced time efficiency of PCR testing not only allows for quicker diagnosis but also ensures that patients receive the right medication, at the right dose, sooner. By accurately identifying the fungal pathogen responsible for onychomycosis, clinicians can tailor treatment plans accordingly, maximizing therapeutic effectiveness.

In summary, the utilization of PCR testing for onychomycosis diagnosis represents a significant breakthrough in the field. Its ability to provide rapid, sensitive, and specific results surpasses the limitations of conventional methods. By expediting diagnosis and facilitating targeted treatment, PCR testing serves as a valuable and indispensable diagnostic tool in identifying fungal pathogens, enabling patients to receive appropriate care promptly.

Respiratory pathogen testing via Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is a highly sensitive and specific method used to detect viral and bacterial pathogens responsible for respiratory infections. This molecular technique amplifies and identifies genetic material from pathogens such as Influenza A and B, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), adenovirus, rhinovirus, and various atypical bacteria including Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, and Bordetella pertussis.

PCR testing offers several key advantages:

• Rapid turnaround time (typically within 24 hours)
   
• High accuracy, even with low levels of viral or bacterial material
   
• Multiplex capability, allowing simultaneous detection of multiple pathogens from a single sample
   

This approach supports accurate diagnosis, guides appropriate treatment (especially distinguishing viral from bacterial infections), reduces unnecessary antibiotic use, and helps prevent the spread of contagious respiratory illnesses. PCR is particularly valuable in clinical decision-making during peak respiratory virus seasons, outbreaks, and in immunocompromised patients.

UTI Molecular Diagnostic Screening: The introduction of UTI PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) testing has revolutionized the diagnosis of urinary tract infections (UTIs). This molecular diagnostic method offers numerous advantages over traditional UTI culture screening.

One significant benefit is the speed of UTI PCR testing. With accurate results available within hours, healthcare providers can promptly initiate appropriate treatment, leading to improved patient outcomes. In contrast, UTI culture screening typically requires 3-5 days to complete, potentially causing delays in diagnosis and treatment.

UTI PCR testing also excels in accuracy. By identifying the DNA of specific pathogens, UTI PCR provides precise detection of the exact pathogen causing the infection. In contrast, UTI culture screening relies on the growth of microbes in a culture medium, which poses inherent risks of missing certain pathogens and compromising specificity and sensitivity.

Another advantage of UTI PCR testing is its ability to detect low levels of microbial presence. Rather than relying on the volume of microbes in the sample, UTI PCR focuses on the presence of pathogen DNA. This high sensitivity enables the detection of co-infections with multiple pathogens, providing a comprehensive understanding of the UTI profile.

Furthermore, UTI PCR reports antibiotic resistance, enabling physicians to make accurate and efficient treatment decisions. This information helps guide the selection of appropriate antibiotics, reducing the risk of ineffective treatment and the development of antibiotic resistance.

UTI Culture Screening: While UTI culture screening has been the traditional method for diagnosing UTIs, it has several limitations compared to UTI PCR testing.

One major drawback of UTI culture screening is the extended time required for results. The 3-5 day turnaround time can lead to delays in initiating treatment, potentially allowing the infection to worsen and increasing the risk of complications. Moreover, the use of antibiotics prior to sample collection can impact culture results, leading to false-negative outcomes and hindering accurate diagnosis.

Specificity and sensitivity are also compromised in UTI culture screening. The reliance on microbial growth in a culture medium makes it challenging to detect all pathogens present in the sample. This limitation increases the risk of missing important pathogens and reduces the overall accuracy of the test.

Additionally, UTI culture screening has limited capabilities in detecting co-infections. The culture method typically focuses on identifying 1-2 microorganisms, potentially overlooking the presence of other pathogens that may contribute to the UTI.

In summary, UTI PCR testing offers significant advantages over UTI culture screening. Its rapid turnaround time, high specificity and sensitivity, ability to detect low microbial presence, and provision of antibiotic resistance information contribute to more accurate and efficient diagnosis and treatment of UTIs. By leveraging the benefits of UTI PCR, healthcare providers can enhance patient care and optimize treatment outcomes.