Suppr超能文献

美国急性护理医院的血培养周转时间及其对实验室流程优化的影响。

Blood Culture Turnaround Time in U.S. Acute Care Hospitals and Implications for Laboratory Process Optimization.

机构信息

Becton, Dickenson and Co., Medical Affairs, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, USA.

Becton, Dickenson and Co., Technology Solution, San Diego, California, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Nov 27;56(12). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00500-18. Print 2018 Dec.

Abstract

The rapid identification of blood culture isolates and antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) results play critical roles for the optimal treatment of patients with bloodstream infections. Whereas others have looked at the time to detection in automated culture systems, we examined the overall time from specimen collection to actionable test results. We examined four points of time, namely, blood specimen collection, Gram stain, organism identification (ID), and AST reports, from electronic data from 13 U.S. hospitals for the 11 most common, clinically significant organisms in septic patients. We compared the differences in turnaround times and the times from when specimens were collected and the results were reported in the 24-h spectrum. From January 2015 to June 2016, 165,593 blood specimens were collected, of which, 9.5% gave positive cultures. No matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry was used during the study period. Across the 10 common bacterial isolates ( = 6,412), the overall median (interquartile range) turnaround times were 0.80 (0.64 to 1.08), 1.81 (1.34 to 2.46), and 2.71 (2.46 to 2.99) days for Gram stain, organism ID, and AST, respectively. For all positive cultures, approximately 25% of the specimens were collected between 6:00 a.m. and 11:59 a.m. In contrast, more of the laboratory reporting times were concentrated between 6:00 a.m. and 11:59 a.m. for Gram stain (43%), organism ID (78%), and AST (82%), respectively ( < 0.001). The overall average turnaround times from specimen collection for Gram stain, organism ID, and AST were approximately 1, 2, and 3 days, respectively. The laboratory results were reported predominantly in the morning hours. Laboratory automation and work flow optimization may play important roles in reducing the microbiology result turnaround time.

摘要

血培养分离物的快速鉴定和抗菌药物敏感性试验(AST)结果对于优化血流感染患者的治疗至关重要。虽然其他人已经研究了自动化培养系统中的检测时间,但我们研究了从标本采集到可操作的测试结果的总时间。我们从美国 13 家医院的电子数据中检查了四个时间点,即血样采集、革兰氏染色、病原体鉴定(ID)和 AST 报告,针对败血症患者中 11 种最常见的临床重要病原体。我们比较了在 24 小时范围内,从标本采集到报告结果的周转时间和时间差异。从 2015 年 1 月至 2016 年 6 月,共采集了 165593 份血样,其中 9.5%的血样呈阳性培养。在研究期间未使用基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间(MALDI-TOF)质谱。在 10 种常见细菌分离株中(=6412),革兰氏染色、病原体鉴定和 AST 的总中位数(四分位距)周转时间分别为 0.80(0.64 至 1.08)、1.81(1.34 至 2.46)和 2.71(2.46 至 2.99)天。对于所有阳性培养物,大约 25%的标本采集时间在上午 6:00 到 11:59 之间。相比之下,革兰氏染色(43%)、病原体鉴定(78%)和 AST(82%)的实验室报告时间更多地集中在上午 6:00 到 11:59 之间( < 0.001)。革兰氏染色、病原体鉴定和 AST 的标本采集总平均周转时间分别约为 1、2 和 3 天。实验室结果主要在上午报告。实验室自动化和工作流程优化可能在缩短微生物学结果周转时间方面发挥重要作用。

相似文献

1
Blood Culture Turnaround Time in U.S. Acute Care Hospitals and Implications for Laboratory Process Optimization.
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Nov 27;56(12). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00500-18. Print 2018 Dec.
6
The impact of delayed analysis of positive blood cultures on the performance of short-term culture followed by MALDI-TOF MS.
J Microbiol Methods. 2020 Oct;177:106027. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2020.106027. Epub 2020 Aug 15.
9
Saving Time in Blood Culture Diagnostics: a Prospective Evaluation of the Qvella FAST-PBC Prep Application on the Fast System.
J Clin Microbiol. 2022 May 18;60(5):e0253321. doi: 10.1128/jcm.02533-21. Epub 2022 Apr 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Direct Detection of via Gold Nanorod Plasmon Resonance.
Sensors (Basel). 2025 Aug 3;25(15):4775. doi: 10.3390/s25154775.
4
Comparison of Automated Point-of-Care Gram Stainer (PoCGS) and Manual Staining.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Apr 29;15(9):1137. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15091137.
7
Plasma cell-free DNA Droplet Digital PCR provides rapid and efficient infectious microbiology diagnosis for febrile haematological patients.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025 Feb 19;15:1522426. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2025.1522426. eCollection 2025.
9
Rapid molecular assays versus blood culture for bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
EClinicalMedicine. 2025 Jan 10;79:103028. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.103028. eCollection 2025 Jan.
10

本文引用的文献

3
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.
Intensive Care Med. 2017 Mar;43(3):304-377. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6. Epub 2017 Jan 18.
4
The Clinical Impact of Rapid, Direct MALDI-ToF Identification of Bacteria from Positive Blood Cultures.
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 30;11(12):e0169332. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169332. eCollection 2016.
5
Antibiotic de-escalation for bloodstream infections and pneumonia: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016 Dec;22(12):960-967. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2016.05.023. Epub 2016 Jun 6.
7
Integrating Rapid Diagnostics and Antimicrobial Stewardship in Two Community Hospitals Improved Process Measures and Antibiotic Adjustment Time.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;37(4):425-32. doi: 10.1017/ice.2015.313. Epub 2016 Jan 7.
10
Impact of appropriate antimicrobial therapy for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock--a quality improvement study.
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 6;9(11):e104475. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104475. eCollection 2014.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验