Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement
American Journal of Medical Quality
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schifman, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Fried, M. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Schifman, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Fried, M. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Solitary Blood Cultures as a Quality Assurance Indicator

Ron B. Schifman, M.D.

Department of Clinical Pathology, Tucson VA Medical Center and University of Arizona, College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona 85723

Calvin L. Strand, M.D.

Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Medical Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York 10003

Egon Braun, M.D.

Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Medical Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York 10003

Anthony Louis-Charles, M.D.

Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Medical Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York 10003

Ronald P. Spark, M.D.

Department of Pathology, Tucson Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona 85712

Mary L. Fried, Ph.D.

Department of Pathology, Tucson Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona 85712

For patients with suspected bacteremia, at least two separate blood cultures are recommended to achieve maximum sensitivity and to properly interpret re sults. Since a single blood collection may signify an improper procedure with serious consequences if the diagnosis of blood stream infection is missed, we in vestigated this problem with studies at three teaching hospitals (A, B, and C) and by a survey of 38 other hospitals. The incidence of solitary blood cultures ranged from 1 to 99% (median 26%) at the surveyed institutions. Among the cases investigated at hospitals B and C, between 10 and 30% of solitary blood cul tures were not clinically indicated, while most of the others were caused by the physician not knowing that one culture was insufficient or by failure to complete the diagnostic plan. Focused concurrent intervention at hospital B was associated with reductions in soli tary blood cultures from 40.0 to 24.6% (p = 0.045) and a decline in those not indicated from 38.1 to 12.5% (p = 0.192). Global educational efforts at hos pital A were associated with a decrease in solitary blood culture rates from 52 to 37% (p = 0.016). These results show that blood culture practice varies widely among institutions in spite of consensus recommen dations for proper specimen collections. We estimate that, nationwide, up to 18,000 etiologic diagnoses of bacteremia are missed annually because of this prob lem. Monitoring institutional solitary blood cultures is recommended as a test utilization indicator and as the basis for improving blood culture practice.

American Journal of Medical Quality, Vol. 6, No. 4, 132-137 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0885713x9100600406
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




Advertisement