由谁进行血培养物采集重要吗?抽血员、护士和住院医师对血液培养物采集规程知识的评估调查结果

IF 0.9 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Matthew Bucala, Debi Hopfner, Mamta Sharma, Nicole Nomides, Jennifer Madigan, Casey Brodsky, Laura Power
{"title":"由谁进行血培养物采集重要吗?抽血员、护士和住院医师对血液培养物采集规程知识的评估调查结果","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

血培养是诊断血流感染的主要方法。然而,血培养污染 (BCC) 可导致不必要的抗生素治疗、额外检查和延长患者住院时间。本质量改进项目旨在评估医护人员对血培养采集规程的了解程度,并评估实验室和非实验室人员的血培养污染率。我们对 2021 年 5 月至 2022 年 4 月期间受污染的培养物进行了回顾性审查,并发放了匿名调查问卷,以评估工作人员对正确的血培养物采集规程的了解程度。实验室工作人员(抽血员)的总体 BCC 感染率为 4.6%,而非实验室工作人员(护士、住院医师和医学生)的 BCC 感染率为 9.7% (P < 0.0001)。在调查中,抽血医师的得分最高(89% 正确),其次是护士(76%)、住院医师和医科学生(64%)。这些数据表明,血液培养规程知识和 BCC 感染率可能存在关联,抽血医师在知识调查中得分最高,污染率最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does it matter who performs blood culture collection? Results of a survey assessing phlebotomist, nurse, and resident knowledge of blood culture collection protocols
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Infection Prevention
Journal of Infection Prevention Nursing-Advanced and Specialized Nursing
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
46
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
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信