ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2019
Centralized Communication of Blood Culture Results Leveraging Antimicrobial Stewardship and Rapid Diagnostics.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-analytical barriers to blood culture completion in a large laboratory network.Journal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Behavior-change interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in human health, animal health, and livestock agriculture: A systematic review.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Bibliometric analysis of peer-reviewed literature on antimicrobial stewardship from 1990 to 2019.Globalization and health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to determine if integrating antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) personnel with rapid diagnostic testing resulted in improved outcomes for patients with positive blood cultures.
methodBeginning in 2016, Saint Luke's Health System (SLHS) implemented a new process where all positive blood cultures were communicated to ASP personnel or SLHS pharmacy staff. Pharmacists then became responsible for interpreting results, assessing patient specific information, and subsequently relaying culture and treatment information to providers. This was a multisite, pre-post, quasi-experimental study (Pre: August to December 2014; Post: August to December 2016). Patients 18 years of age and older with a positive blood culture during admission were included (2014, n = 218; 2016, n = 286). Coprimary outcomes of time to optimal and appropriate therapy were determined from time of culture positivity via gram stain. Secondary outcomes focused on clinical, process, and fiscal endpoints. A pre-post intervention physician survey was conducted to assess the impact on antimicrobial decision making and perceived effect on patient outcomes.
resultsThere was no difference in time to appropriate therapy groups (
conclusionsAn ASP-led blood culture communication process for patients with positive blood cultures was shown to improve time to optimal therapy, support physicians in their decision making on critical lab data, and improve the care for hospitalized patients.
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.