{"title":"静脉切开术小组减少了血液培养污染率,节省了资金。","authors":"S Surdulescu, D Utamsingh, R Shekar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the extent of resource utilization due to contaminated blood cultures.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Case-control retrospective analysis. Twenty-three patients who had contaminated blood cultures were matched by age, underlying diseases, and discharge diagnoses with 23 patients who had negative blood cultures.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>St Luke's Medical Center, a community teaching hospital in Cleveland, Ohio. The phlebotomy team was eliminated in November 1993 to reduce the costs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Blood cultures drawn by the phlebotomy team had a lower contamination rate compared with those drawn by nonphlebotomists (2.6% vs 5.6%). Patients with contaminated blood cultures were compared to those with negative blood cultures. The following parameters were found to be statistically significant: total hospital length of stay (LOS; 13.9 vs 5.5 days; P = .002), postculture LOS (8.9 vs 4.6; P = .01), postculture number of days on antibiotics (5.9 vs 2.9; P = .03), vancomycin use (9 vs 2 patients; P = .03), postculture cost of antibiotics ($762 vs $121; P = .004), and postculture hospital cost per patient ($10,515 vs $4,213; P = .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated a substantial increase in resource utilization in our hospital due to contaminated blood cultures. The reinstitution of a phlebotomy team could be a cost-effective solution with savings between $950,000 and $1.5 million per year for our hospital.</p>","PeriodicalId":79831,"journal":{"name":"Clinical performance and quality health care","volume":"6 2","pages":"60-2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Phlebotomy teams reduce blood-culture contamination rate and save money.\",\"authors\":\"S Surdulescu, D Utamsingh, R Shekar\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the extent of resource utilization due to contaminated blood cultures.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Case-control retrospective analysis. Twenty-three patients who had contaminated blood cultures were matched by age, underlying diseases, and discharge diagnoses with 23 patients who had negative blood cultures.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>St Luke's Medical Center, a community teaching hospital in Cleveland, Ohio. The phlebotomy team was eliminated in November 1993 to reduce the costs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Blood cultures drawn by the phlebotomy team had a lower contamination rate compared with those drawn by nonphlebotomists (2.6% vs 5.6%). Patients with contaminated blood cultures were compared to those with negative blood cultures. The following parameters were found to be statistically significant: total hospital length of stay (LOS; 13.9 vs 5.5 days; P = .002), postculture LOS (8.9 vs 4.6; P = .01), postculture number of days on antibiotics (5.9 vs 2.9; P = .03), vancomycin use (9 vs 2 patients; P = .03), postculture cost of antibiotics ($762 vs $121; P = .004), and postculture hospital cost per patient ($10,515 vs $4,213; P = .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated a substantial increase in resource utilization in our hospital due to contaminated blood cultures. The reinstitution of a phlebotomy team could be a cost-effective solution with savings between $950,000 and $1.5 million per year for our hospital.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical performance and quality health care\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"60-2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical performance and quality health care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical performance and quality health care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:了解血培养物污染对资源的利用程度。设计:病例对照回顾性分析。23名血培养被污染的患者与23名血培养阴性的患者在年龄、基础疾病和出院诊断方面进行了匹配。地点:圣卢克医疗中心,俄亥俄州克利夫兰的一家社区教学医院。为了减少费用,1993年11月取消了放血小组。结果:与非采血组相比,采血组采血的污染率较低(2.6%对5.6%)。将血培养受污染的患者与血培养阴性的患者进行比较。发现以下参数具有统计学意义:总住院时间(LOS);13.9 vs 5.5天;P = .002),后文化LOS (8.9 vs 4.6;P = 0.01)、抗生素培养后天数(5.9 vs 2.9;P = .03),万古霉素使用(9例vs 2例;P = .03),培养后抗生素成本(762美元vs 121美元;P = 0.004),以及后文化医院每位患者的费用(10,515美元vs 4,213美元;P = .001)。结论:本研究表明,由于血培养物污染,我院资源利用率大幅增加。重新设立一个放血小组可能是一个具有成本效益的解决办法,每年可为我们医院节省95万至150万美元。
Phlebotomy teams reduce blood-culture contamination rate and save money.
Objective: To determine the extent of resource utilization due to contaminated blood cultures.
Design: Case-control retrospective analysis. Twenty-three patients who had contaminated blood cultures were matched by age, underlying diseases, and discharge diagnoses with 23 patients who had negative blood cultures.
Setting: St Luke's Medical Center, a community teaching hospital in Cleveland, Ohio. The phlebotomy team was eliminated in November 1993 to reduce the costs.
Results: Blood cultures drawn by the phlebotomy team had a lower contamination rate compared with those drawn by nonphlebotomists (2.6% vs 5.6%). Patients with contaminated blood cultures were compared to those with negative blood cultures. The following parameters were found to be statistically significant: total hospital length of stay (LOS; 13.9 vs 5.5 days; P = .002), postculture LOS (8.9 vs 4.6; P = .01), postculture number of days on antibiotics (5.9 vs 2.9; P = .03), vancomycin use (9 vs 2 patients; P = .03), postculture cost of antibiotics ($762 vs $121; P = .004), and postculture hospital cost per patient ($10,515 vs $4,213; P = .001).
Conclusions: This study demonstrated a substantial increase in resource utilization in our hospital due to contaminated blood cultures. The reinstitution of a phlebotomy team could be a cost-effective solution with savings between $950,000 and $1.5 million per year for our hospital.