ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Lack of specific guidelines regarding collection of blood for culture from central venous catheters (CVCs) has led to inconsistencies in policies among hospitals. Currently, no specific professional or regulatory recommendations exist in relation to using, reinfusing, or discarding blood drawn from CVCs before drawing blood for a culture. Repeated wasting of blood may harm immunocompromised pediatric oncology patients. The purpose of this comparative study was to determine whether differences exist between blood cultures obtained from the first 5 mL of blood drawn from a CVC line when compared with the second 5 mL drawn. METHODS: During 2009-2011, 62 pediatric oncology patients with CVCs and orders for blood cultures to determine potential sepsis were enrolled during ED visits. Trained study nurses aseptically drew blood and injected the normally discarded first 5 mL and the second specimen (usual care) into separate culture bottles. Specimens were processed in the microbiology laboratory per hospital policy. RESULTS: Positive cultures were evaluated to assess agreement between specimen results and to determine that the identified pathogen was not a contaminant. Out of 186 blood culture pairs, 4.8% demonstrated positive results. In all positive-positive matches, the normal discard specimen contained the same organism as the usual care specimen. In 4 matches, the normally discarded specimen demonstrated notably earlier time to positivity (4 to 31 hours) compared with the usual care specimen, which resulted in earlier initiation of definitive antibiotics. DISCUSSION: These findings support the accuracy of the specimen that is normally discarded and suggest the need to reconsider its use for blood culture testing.
Subject(s)
Central Venous Catheters , Emergency Nursing/methods , Neoplasms/blood , Phlebotomy/methods , Sepsis/blood , California , Child , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Pediatrics/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , Sepsis/complicationsABSTRACT
In February 2007, we experienced an abrupt 8-fold increase in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE)-positive pediatric hematology/oncology patients in isolation per day, peaking at 12 patients in isolation per day in June 2007. We enforced and expanded infection prevention practices and initiated a rigorous 6-month clearance process. After noting an eventual decrease, we modified clearance to a 3-month process, maintaining <1 patient/day in isolation by June 2009, subjectively improving family and staff satisfaction after this 2-year process. VRE infection was relatively uncommon (7.8%), although continued VRE colonization portended an overall poorer prognosis.
Subject(s)
Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Enterococcus/drug effects , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/prevention & control , Infection Control , Oncology Service, Hospital , Patient-Centered Care , Vancomycin Resistance , Child , Family , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/transmission , Humans , Prognosis , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
Performance of indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) assays and rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDT) during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic was evaluated, along with the relative effects of age and illness severity on test accuracy. Clinicians and laboratories submitted specimens on patients with respiratory illness to public health from April to mid October 2009 for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing as part of pandemic H1N1 surveillance efforts in Orange County, CA; IFA and RIDT were performed in clinical settings. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of the 2009 pandemic H1N1 strain, now officially named influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, were calculated for 638 specimens. Overall, approximately 30% of IFA tests and RIDTs tested by PCR were falsely negative (sensitivity 71% and 69%, respectively). Sensitivity of RIDT ranged from 45% to 84% depending on severity and age of patients. In hospitalized children, sensitivity of IFA (75%) was similar to RIDT (84%). Specificity of tests performed on hospitalized children was 94% for IFA and 80% for RIDT. Overall sensitivity of RIDT in this study was comparable to previously published studies on pandemic H1N1 influenza and sensitivity of IFA was similar to what has been reported in children for seasonal influenza. Both diagnostic tests produced a high number of false negatives and should not be used to rule out influenza infection.