LDX Discussion, page-863

Uptake potential surrounding the end user's (Doctors, Nurses, etc) confidence while using the product is a fair question.

I believe LDX is diligently addressing this concern in multiple ways. For example:

- there are multiple and various ongoing and completed medical research reports published surrounding the accuracy and the potential for positive results in the use of FebriDx in a clinical use environment. These types of studies provide confidence to the end user (Doctors, Nurses, etc) regarding the use and accuracy of the product in a clinical environment. I have posted some of these studies here before, and might get a chance to post more later, but a quick google search or a google scholar search will turn up the required results.

- I believe LDX has stated that as a part of the FebriDX rollout, a new work-flow for product use will be established. Meaning that doctors and nurses will have clear instructions from management and possibly even govt health departments on how to best use the product. Of course if practitioners use LDX products according to a authorised and standardised workflow, then the risk on the practitioner is really no longer present.

- LDX is supported by a BARDA grant (US Govt department of health) to further conduct studies on the easy use and accurate use of LDX products so that LDX can achieve a CLIA waiver to sell their products to a broader market in the USA. If the US govt is actively supporting LDX in its efforts, then this would suggest that the product has potential for successful use in a clinical environment.

There are other considerations that can be spoken about (i.e. World Health Org policy and support, etc..) but this post is getting too long already.

Hope that helps.