ArticleJundishapur journal of microbiology2016
A Multicenter Evaluation of Blood Culture Practices, Contamination Rates, and the Distribution of Causative Bacteria.
Article in Jundishapur journal of microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of ambulance blood cultures in patients with suspected sepsis. A rural prospective cohort study.Infection · 2026Article
- Successful Management of Pediatric Patients with Low-Risk Febrile Neutropenia Using a Clinical Care Pathway in Egypt.Infection & chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Increased incidence of blood culture contaminations during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.Infection · 2025Observational
- Microbiological performance and adherence in blood culture protocols: The role of a second anaerobic bottle.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Underutilization and Quality Gaps in Blood Culture Processing in Public Hospitals of Peru.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2021Article
- The Clinical Impact of Rapid Molecular Microbiological Diagnostics for Pathogen and Resistance Gene Identification in Patients With Sepsis: A Systematic Review.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Review
- Reduction in the processing of possible blood culture contaminants by the application of a selection criterion.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Best Practices of Blood Cultures in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 17 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognostic value of blood culture testing in the diagnosis of bacteremia is limited by contamination.
objectivesIn this multicenter study, the aim was to evaluate the contamination rates of blood cultures as well as the parameters that affect the culture results. MATERIALS AND
methodsSample collection practices and culture data obtained from 16 university/research hospitals were retrospectively evaluated. A total of 214,340 blood samples from 43,254 patients admitted to the centers in 2013 were included in this study. The blood culture results were evaluated based on the three phases of laboratory testing: the pre-analytic, the analytic, and the post-analytic phase.
resultsBlood samples were obtained from the patients through either the peripheral venous route (64%) or an intravascular catheter (36%). Povidone-iodine (60%) or alcohol (40%) was applied to disinfect the skin. Of the 16 centers, 62.5% have no dedicated phlebotomy team, 68.7% employed a blood culture system, 86.7% conducted additional studies with pediatric bottles, and 43.7% with anaerobic bottles. One center maintained a blood culture quality control study. The average growth rate in the bottles of blood cultures during the defined period (1259 - 26,400/year) was 32.3%. Of the growing microorganisms, 67% were causative agents, while 33% were contaminants. The contamination rates of the centers ranged from 1% to 17%. The average growth time for the causative bacteria was 21.4 hours, while it was 36.3 hours for the contaminant bacteria. The most commonly isolated pathogens were Escherichia coli (22.45%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) (20.11%). Further, the most frequently identified contaminant bacteria were CoNS (44.04%).
conclusionsThe high contamination rates were remarkable in this study. We suggest that the hospitals' staff should be better trained in blood sample collection and processing. Sterile glove usage, alcohol usage for disinfection, the presence of a phlebotomy team, and quality control studies may all contribute to decreasing the contamination rates. Health policy makers should therefore provide the necessary financial support to obtain the required materials and equipment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.