ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2020
Improved blood culture workflow in the time to detection of microorganisms placing incubators systems outside of microbiology laboratory.
Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2020. 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.
- Blood culture quality and turnaround time of clinical microbiology laboratories in Chinese Teaching Hospitals: A multicenter study.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2024Article
- Rising Drug Resistance Among Gram-Negative Pathogens in Bloodstream Infections: A Multicenter Study in Ulanhot, Inner Mongolia (2017-2021).Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Time to decision in sepsis.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe analyzed the workflow of the blood culture procedure with one blood culture incubator in the microbiology laboratory, in comparison with the workflow with the incubators systems placing outside, and in a microbiology laboratory without 24-h staffing.
methodsWe assessed the elapsed time (ET) and time-to-result (TTR) in the two laboratory workflows during 1 month period in consecutive years. First period with one BACT/ALERT 3D module located in the microbiology laboratory (ML) (access 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and second period with three BACT/ALERT VIRTUO modules (one located in ML and two in the core sample laboratory, access 24 h).
resultsThe mean ET with BACT/ALERT 3D was 7.09 ± 6.15 h and 1.32 ± 3.14 h with BACT/ALERT VIRTUO. During the 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. shift, the average ETs were 3.54 ± 5.06 vs 1.59 ± 1.29 h for the two time periods, respectively. Since the automated loading of bottles on the BACT/ALERT VIRTUO allows processing of blood cultures during the night shift, there was a significant reduction of time during the 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. shift, where the average ET was 10.52 ± 5.23 vs 1.00 ± 4.40 h, respectively. The percentage of positivity in the first period was 9.03% and 11.18% in the second (p = 0.0003). The average TTR in the first period was 24.78 ± 15.9 h and 16.85 ± 14.13 h in the second (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsEasy 24-h access to blood culture incubators resulted in significant improvement in the workflow of blood culture, decreasing ET, and therefore decreasing the time to positivity and the efficiency of recovery.
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.