Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42164267›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026

Rapid AST in practice - a workflow analysis of the QuickMIC

Amanda Kindvall Åhman, Victor Englöf, Kajsa Knagge, Lucas Reibenspies, Maria Avolio, Patricia Cabral da Silva, Patrizia Cambieri, Cristina Costa, Adriana Coutinho, Monica Dotta and 25 more

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

35 authors.

Amanda Kindvall ÅhmanGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Victor EnglöfGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Kajsa KnaggeGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Lucas ReibenspiesGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Maria AvolioMicrobiology and Virology Unit, University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Patricia Cabral da SilvaDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Kalmar County Hospital, Kalmar, Sweden.
Patrizia CambieriStruttura Complessa (SC) Microbiologia e Virologia, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.
Cristina CostaMicrobiology and Virology Unit, University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Adriana CoutinhoLaboratório de Patologia Clínica, Hospital do Espírito Santo de Évora, Évora, Portugal.
Monica DottaStruttura Semplice Dipartimentale (SSD) Microbiologia, Ospedale di Sanremo, Sanremo, Italy.
Pier Andrea DusiStruttura Semplice Dipartimentale (SSD) Microbiologia, Ospedale di Sanremo, Sanremo, Italy.
Danielle FenwickMicrobiology Research, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Giorgia GregoriDipartimento Medicina di Laboratorio, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale (AUSL) di Piacenza, Ospedale Guglielmo da Saliceto, Piacenza, Italy.
Sandra GrunewaldInstitute for Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Hygiene, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Kerry LawsMicrobiology Research, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Giuliana Lo CascioDipartimento Medicina di Laboratorio, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale (AUSL) di Piacenza, Ospedale Guglielmo da Saliceto, Piacenza, Italy.
Paulo LopesDepartment of Microbiology of Clinical Pathology, Unidade Local de Saúde Gaia Espinho, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal.
Emma MarrsMicrobiology Research, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Luis MoraisDepartment of Microbiology of Clinical Pathology, Unidade Local de Saúde do Médio (ULSM) Tejo, Tomar, Portugal.
Joni MotaDepartment of Microbiology of Clinical Pathology, Unidade Local de Saúde do Médio (ULSM) Tejo, Tomar, Portugal.
Loredana PangaroDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Vercelli Hospital, Vercelli, Italy.
Micaela PelagiDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Vercelli Hospital, Vercelli, Italy.
Sara PeterssonDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Kalmar County Hospital, Kalmar, Sweden.
Damiano PiciccoStruttura Semplice Dipartimentale (SSD) Microbiologia, Ospedale di Sanremo, Sanremo, Italy.
Tamara RuegamerInstitute for Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Hygiene, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sarah ShodunkeMicrobiology Research, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Annika WistedtDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Kalmar County Hospital, Kalmar, Sweden.
Hanna WokseppDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Kalmar County Hospital, Kalmar, Sweden.
Andrea ZappavignaDipartimento Medicina di Laboratorio, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale (AUSL) di Piacenza, Ospedale Guglielmo da Saliceto, Piacenza, Italy.
Giuliana GerminarioDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Alessia CantianiMicrobiology Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Simone AmbrettiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Cecilia JohanssonGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Anna OlssonGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
Christer MalmbergGradientech AB, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Timely administration of appropriate antimicrobial therapy is critical for sepsis management, yet conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods typically provide results within 24-48 hours after positivity. We evaluated the performance and workflow impact of a novel rapid AST system that delivers actionable results within 2-4 hours, compared to standard in-house laboratory methods used across multiple European centers. Methods: A prospective, multicenter study was conducted at 12 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, Italy, and Portugal. Positive blood culture samples were analysed in parallel using the QuickMIC rapid AST system and the local reference AST method (broth microdilution, automated systems, rapid AST, or disk diffusion, depending on site). Essential agreement, categorical agreement, and error rates were calculated as compared to the local method. In addition, workflow analysis quantified the time saved in delivering actionable AST results, defined as the availability of clinically interpretable susceptibility categories. Results: For a total of 306 evaluable isolates (from 309 collected) across all hospitals, QuickMIC demonstrated high concordance with reference methods, with categorical agreement exceeding 90% for the majority of tested antibiotic-pathogen combinations. Workflow analysis revealed a potential reduction in turnaround time of 17-45 hours compared with standard methods. For 88% of all tests, this allowed actionable AST results to be available within the same clinical shift rather than on subsequent days. This acceleration was consistent across both northern and southern European sites despite heterogeneity in reference methods and local laboratory workflows. Conclusions: The novel rapid AST system reliably provides susceptibility results in 2-4 hours directly from positive blood cultures, with performance comparable to established in-house methods. Implementation of this approach can substantially shorten the time to actionable results, offering clinicians the ability to optimize antimicrobial therapy significantly earlier during sepsis management. These findings support the adoption of rapid AST as a valuable tool to improve patient care and stewardship outcomes across diverse European hospital settings.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaLaboratories, ClinicalSepsisWorkflowEuropeHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsProspective StudiesRapid Diagnostic TestsTime FactorsAnti-Bacterial Agentsantimicrobial resistancediagnosticsmicrofluidicrapid ASTsepsis

Identifiers

PMID42164267
PMCPMC13183651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.