Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Heliyon ; 10(16): e35615, 2024 Aug 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39220915

RESUMO

Background: Bacteremia represents high rates of morbidity and mortality, especially in developing countries, highlighting the need for a diagnostic method that allows prompt and appropriate patient treatment. This study compared microbiological performance and adherence of two blood culture protocols for the diagnosis of bacteremia. Methods: Quasi-experimental study conducted between June 2022 and February 2023. Two blood culture protocols were evaluated. Protocol 1 included two aerobic bottles and one anaerobic bottle. Protocol 2 included two aerobic and two anaerobic bottles. Protocols were analyzed in three phases: evaluation of protocol 1 (Phase 1); evaluation of protocol 1 plus educational activities for healthcare staff (Phase 2) and evaluation of protocol 2 (Phase 3). Results: 342 patients and 1155 blood culture bottles (732 aerobic and 423 anaerobic) were included. Positivity was 17.6 %, 22.8 % and 19.4 % in phases 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Among patients with bacteremia, 84.5 % had positive anaerobic bottles, with 9.9 % showing growth only in this bottle. The contamination rates were 1.9 %, 0.3 %, and 0.8 % for each phase, mainly in aerobic bottles. Median positivity time was 11 h for both bottes aerobic and anaerobic. Overall nursing adherence increased from 13.1 % in Phase 1, 25.9 % in Phase 2, and 28.1 % in Phase 3 (p = 0.009). Conclusions: The findings indicate that adding a second anaerobic bottle does not enhance blood culture positivity. Rather than increasing bottle quantity, staff training might be a more effective approach to optimize results.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA