4.5 Article

Increase of blood culture contamination during COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective descriptive study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL
卷 49, 期 11, 页码 1359-1361

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2021.08.0250196-6553

关键词

COVID-19; Blood culture; Contamination; Bacteremia; Intensive Care Unit; Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found a significant increase in blood culture contamination in the ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic, while true bacteremia also increased. Therefore, a safe and effective way to obtain blood cultures from patients with COVID-19 should be sought.
Background: Secondary bacterial infection during the care of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients poses risks to the patients, but there are concerns of an increase in blood culture contamination. Methods: A retrospective comparative study was conducted from April 1 to December 31, 2020, when the patients with COVID-19 were taken care of (pandemic period, PP), and it was compared with the same period in 2019 (pre-pandemic period, pre-PP). Results: A total of 346 patients with COVID-19 were hospitalized during the study period in 2020. A total of 1,040 and 918 blood cultures were taken during PPP and PP respectively. 38 and 56 contaminations occurred during pre-PP and PP respectively (3.7% [95% CI 2.6%-5.0%], vs 6.1% [95% CI 4.6%-7.8%], P = .015). For the ICU, 10 and 32 contaminations occurred during the same periods (5.0% [95% CI 2.4%-9.0%], vs 12.5% [95% CI 8.7%17.1%], P = .0097). True bacteremia in the ICU per patient-day also increased during the PP. Conclusions: We found a significant increase in blood culture contamination during the COVID-19 pandemic in the ICU setting, while true bacteremia also increased. A safe and effective way to obtain blood cultures from patients with COVID-19 should be sought. (c) 2021 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据