ArticleJAMA network open2022
Analysis of Blood Culture Collection and Laboratory Processing Practices in Israel.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- End-to-End Timeliness of Blood Culture Diagnostics: A One-Month Observational Study of 5121 Bottles.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current landscape and challenges in anaerobic bloodstream infections: epidemiology, microbiology, and clinical management.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Comparative Assessment of Rapid Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Methods for Bloodstream Infections in a Non-24/7 Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Factors Contributing to Delayed Initiation of Appropriate Antimicrobial Treatment in Patients With Streptococcal Bacteremia.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Interrupted-time-series analysis of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on blood culture utilization in Shanghai.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Every Crisis Is an Opportunity: Advancing Blood Culture Stewardship During a Blood Culture Bottle Shortage.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Impact of Blood Culture Contamination on Antibiotic Use, Resource Utilization, and Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Dutch and US Hospitals.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Process improvement in automated blood cultures: Our road to better patient care.Medical journal, Armed Forces IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Blood culturing is a critical diagnostic procedure affecting patient outcomes and antibiotic stewardship. Although there are standards for blood culturing, the process is not often measured. Objectives: To evaluate processes related to the diagnosis of bloodstream infection and compare them with best practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A quality improvement study using laboratory data from January 1 to June 30, 2019, was conducted in 28 (96.6%) Israeli acute care hospitals. All blood cultures (BCs) performed on samples from adults and children in a period of 147 hospital-months were analyzed. Data analysis was performed from April 12, 2021, to September 9, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: True pathogen detection rate, contamination rate, proportion of adults with blood cultures performed, proportion of adult culturing episodes with only 1 set or bottle used, and median time of steps from sample collection to pathogen identification. Results: The data set consisted of 348 987 BC bottles. Bloodstream infection was detected in a median of 6.7% (IQR, 5.8%-8.2%) of adult culturing episodes and 1.1% (IQR, 0.7%-1.9%) of pediatric episodes. Eleven of 27 hospitals (40.7%) with adult patients met the standard of a contamination rate of less than 3% and only 2 hospitals (7.4%) met the more stringent standard of less than or equal to 1% contamination rate. The percentage of adults with blood cultures ranged from 2.7% to 29.0% (mean [SD], 15.7% [6.0%]). There was an association between sampling rate and pathogen detection until BCs were performed in 17% of adult admissions. The percentage of solitary BCs ranged from 47.8% to 94.4%. An estimated 1745 of 7436 (23.5%) adult bloodstream infections went undetected because solitary BCs were performed, anaerobic bottles were not used, or BCs were not performed. Median processing time was 51.2 (IQR, 33.9-78.0) hours, 3 times the optimal time: 4.4 (IQR, 1.7-12.5) hours for the preanalytical stage, 15.9 (IQR, 10.2-23.6) hours from incubation to growth detection, 4.5 (IQR, 1.5-10.7) hours from detection to Gram stain, and 30.9 (IQR, 22.0-41.9) hours from detection to isolate identification. An 8.6-hour delay was related to off-hours operating of laboratories. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that the multistep process of blood culturing is not managed comprehensively in Israel, leading to poor clinical practices and delayed results.
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.