Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27335646›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality improvement reports2016

A change of culture: reducing blood culture contamination rates in an Emergency Department.

James Bentley, Shobhan Thakore, L Muir, Alastair Baird, Jennifer Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality improvement reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

James BentleyNHS Tayside, Scotland.
Shobhan ThakoreNHS Tayside, Scotland.
L MuirNHS Tayside, Scotland.
Alastair BairdNHS Tayside, Scotland.
Jennifer LeeNHS Tayside, Scotland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood cultures are an important investigation to help tailor effective management for patients with severe sepsis. Frequent contaminated samples increase laboratory workload and can delay or cause incorrect changes to patient management. This can prolong patient hospitalisation, increase the risk of harm and increase cost to health boards. Current guidelines advocate a contamination rate of 2-3%. From January 2013 to November 2014 inclusive, the contamination rate was 4.74% in our Emergency Department, responsible for initial management and investigation of over 40 cases of sepsis per month. A Quality Improvement team was created to try to reduce contamination rates to the recommended target. An initial baseline survey of local staff showed good understanding of when to obtain a blood culture but there was variability in the methods and equipment used. A project was then conducted which focused on rationalising and standardising equipment and technique for blood culture sampling along with staff education to support this change. A simple department target of 30 days free from a contaminated blood culture was created which, if achieved, would ensure a contamination rate of less than 3%. This was supported by ongoing surveillance of contamination rates and investigation of contaminated sample cases. We were able to then identify high risk patients and factors which increased the chance of blood culture contamination. This allowed us to formulate solutions to help reduce the risks of contamination. Department achievements and learning points to help prevent further contamination were fed back positively to all staff. This project operated for 12-months and successfully reduced local contamination rates to 2.0%.

Identifiers

PMID27335646
PMCPMC4915310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.