ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2024
Sites of blood collection and topical disinfectants associated with contaminated cultures: An ambidirectional cohort study.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sites of blood collection and topical disinfectants associated with contaminated cultures: An ambidirectional cohort study.Journal of general and family medicine · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We aimed to determine whether puncture sites for blood sampling and topical disinfectants are associated with rates of contaminated blood cultures in the emergency department (ED) of a single institution. Methods: This single-center, ambidirectional cohort study of 548 consecutive patients ≥20 years of age was performed in the ED of a university hospital in Japan over a 13-month period. Pairs of blood samples were collected for aerobic and anaerobic cultures from patients in the ED. Physicians selected puncture sites and topical disinfectants according to their personal preference. Results: Potential contamination was identified in 110 of the 548 patients (20.1%). One hundred fourteen (20.8%) patients showed true-positive results for bacteremia, and 324 (59.1%) patients showed true-negative results. Multivariate analysis revealed more frequent contamination when puncture sites were disinfected with povidone-iodine (PVI) than with alcohol/chlorhexidine (ACHX) (adjusted risk difference, 19.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI]), 15.7-22.6; Conclusion: Rates of contaminated blood cultures were significantly higher when blood was collected from the CV catheter or femoral sites with PVI as the topical disinfectant.
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.