Does it matter who performs blood culture collection? Results of a survey assessing phlebotomist, nurse, and resident knowledge of blood culture collection protocols
Matthew Bucala, Debi Hopfner, Mamta Sharma, Nicole Nomides, Jennifer Madigan, Casey Brodsky, Laura Power
{"title":"Does it matter who performs blood culture collection? Results of a survey assessing phlebotomist, nurse, and resident knowledge of blood culture collection protocols","authors":"Matthew Bucala, Debi Hopfner, Mamta Sharma, Nicole Nomides, Jennifer Madigan, Casey Brodsky, Laura Power","doi":"10.1177/17571774241232064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Blood cultures are the primary method for diagnosing bloodstream infections. However, blood culture contamination (BCC) can lead to unnecessary antibiotic treatment, additional tests, and extended patient time in the hospital. The aim of this quality improvement project was to evaluate healthcare workers’ knowledge of blood culture collection protocols and evaluate the blood culture contamination rates of laboratory and non-laboratory staff. We performed a retrospective review of contaminated cultures between May 2021 and April 2022, and anonymous surveys were distributed to assess staff knowledge of proper blood culture collection protocols. Laboratory staff (phlebotomy) had an overall BCC rate of 4.6% compared to a non-laboratory staff (nurses, residents, and medical students) rate of 9.7% ( p < 0.0001). On the survey, phlebotomists had the best score (89% correct), followed by nurses (76%) and residents and medical students (64%). These data suggest that blood culture protocol knowledge and BCC rates may be related, with phlebotomists scoring highest on the knowledge survey and demonstrating the lowest contamination rates.","PeriodicalId":16094,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infection Prevention","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infection Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17571774241232064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Blood cultures are the primary method for diagnosing bloodstream infections. However, blood culture contamination (BCC) can lead to unnecessary antibiotic treatment, additional tests, and extended patient time in the hospital. The aim of this quality improvement project was to evaluate healthcare workers’ knowledge of blood culture collection protocols and evaluate the blood culture contamination rates of laboratory and non-laboratory staff. We performed a retrospective review of contaminated cultures between May 2021 and April 2022, and anonymous surveys were distributed to assess staff knowledge of proper blood culture collection protocols. Laboratory staff (phlebotomy) had an overall BCC rate of 4.6% compared to a non-laboratory staff (nurses, residents, and medical students) rate of 9.7% ( p < 0.0001). On the survey, phlebotomists had the best score (89% correct), followed by nurses (76%) and residents and medical students (64%). These data suggest that blood culture protocol knowledge and BCC rates may be related, with phlebotomists scoring highest on the knowledge survey and demonstrating the lowest contamination rates.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Infection Prevention is the professional publication of the Infection Prevention Society. The aim of the journal is to advance the evidence base in infection prevention and control, and to provide a publishing platform for all health professionals interested in this field of practice. Journal of Infection Prevention is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed publication containing a wide range of articles: ·Original primary research studies ·Qualitative and quantitative studies ·Reviews of the evidence on various topics ·Practice development project reports ·Guidelines for practice ·Case studies ·Overviews of infectious diseases and their causative organisms ·Audit and surveillance studies/projects