OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy and reaction time of a new biopsy urease test, Pronto Dry (Medical Instruments Corporation, Solothurn, Switzerland) and the CLO test in the diagnosis of H. pylori infection.

METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting with dyspepsia to the endoscopy unit, University of Malaya Medical Centre were recruited for the study. Patients who were previously treated for H. pylori infection or who had received antibiotics, proton pump inhibitors or bismuth compounds in the preceding 4 weeks were excluded. H. pylori diagnosis was made based on the ultra rapid urease test and histological examination of gastric biopsies. Four antral and four corpus biopsies were taken for this purpose from all patients. A diagnosis of H. pylori infection was made when both the ultra rapid urease test and histology were positive in either the antral or corpus biopsies. A negative diagnosis of H. pylori was made when both tests from antral and corpus biopsies were all negative. Another four antral and four corpus biopsies (two each) were taken for the Pronto Dry and CLO tests. The Pronto Dry and CLO tests were stored and performed according to the manufacturer's instruction.

RESULTS: Two hundred and eight patients were recruited in the study. Eighty-six of the patients were males and 122 were females. The mean age was 46.3 years with a range of 15-82 years. The results for both the Pronto Dry and the CLO tests were completely concordant with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of 98.1%, 100%, 100%, 98.1% and 99%, respectively. The Pronto Dry test showed a faster reaction time to positive compared with the CLO test, with 96.2% positive reaction by 30 min versus 70.8% and 100% positive reaction time by 55 min versus 83%. The colorimetric change was also more distinct with the Pronto Dry test compared with the CLO test.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed across PubMed, EMBASE, Emerald Insight and grey literature sources. The key terms used in the search include 'distribution', 'method', and 'physician', focusing on research articles published in English from 2002 to 2022 that described methods or tools to measure hospital-based physicians' distribution. Relevant articles were selected through a two-level screening process and critically appraised. The primary outcome is the measurement tools used to assess the distribution of hospital-based physicians. Study characteristics, tool advantages and limitations were also extracted. The extracted data were synthesised narratively.

RESULTS: Out of 7,199 identified articles, 13 met the inclusion criteria. Among the selected articles, 12 were from Asia and one from Africa. The review identified eight measurement tools: Gini coefficients and Lorenz curve, Robin Hood index, Theil index, concentration index, Workload Indicator of Staffing Need method, spatial autocorrelation analysis, mixed integer linear programming model and cohortcomponent model. These tools rely on fundamental data concerning population and physician numbers to generate outputs. Additionally, five studies employed a combination of these tools to gain a comprehensive understanding of physician distribution dynamics.