ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Changes in Use of Blood Cultures in a COVID-19-Dedicated Tertiary Hospital.
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood Culture Contamination Creep Independent of COVID-19 Pandemics: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Increased incidence of blood culture contaminations during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.Infection · 2025Observational
- Bacterial Infections, Trends, and Resistance Patterns in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania-A Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Impact of ESKAPE Pathogens on Bacteremia: A Three-Year Surveillance Study at a Major Hospital in Southern Italy.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Bacteriological profile and antibiotic sensitivity pattern of bloodstream infections from a teaching institution in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, North India.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood cultures should be collected within an hour in the setting of sepsis/septic shock. The contamination rate should be below 3%. Worldwide reports have described an increase in blood contamination rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a retrospective analysis of the blood cultures collected during a 10-month period (March−December 2020) at NIID “Prof. Dr. Matei Balș”. The results were compared with data from the pre-pandemic period (March−December 2016) and with the existing data in the literature. During the pandemic, there was a significant decrease in the number of blood cultures collected (1274 blood cultures in 2020 vs. 5399 in 2016). The contamination rate was higher in 2020 (11.7%) compared to 2016 (8.2%), p < 0.001. The rate of infectious episodes in which the etiological agent was identified was constant: 11% in 2020 versus 11.9% in 2016, p = 0.479, but there were fewer invasive bacterial/fungal infections: 0.95/1000 patient days in 2020 vs. 2.39/1000 patient days in 2016, p < 0.001. We observed a change in the species distribution. The Gram-negative isolate’s proportion increased from 50.6% to 63.1% and the gram-positive isolate’s proportion decreased from 31.8% to 19%. Collection of a low number of blood cultures and a high contamination rate was identified in our clinic. In order to improve the usefulness of blood cultures as a diagnostic method, at least two sets should be collected in aseptic conditions.
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.