Isopropyl alcohol is as efficient as chlorhexidine to prevent contamination of blood cultures

Initial Specimen Diversion Device Utilization Mitigates Blood Culture Contamination Across Regional Community Hospital and Acute Care Facility

A West Virginia regional community hospital incorporated an initial specimen diversion device (ISDD) into conventional blood culture protocol with the objective to bring the hospital-wide blood culture contamination (BCC) rate from a 3.06% preintervention rate to a target performance level below 1%. Emergency department staff, laboratory phlebotomists, and nursing staff on acute-critical care floors were trained on ISDD (Steripath Gen2, Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) operating procedure and utilized the device for blood culture sample collection with adult patients from September 2020 through April 2021. Of 5642 blood culture sets collected hospital-wide, 4631 were collected with the ISDD, whereas the remaining sets were collected via the conventional method. The ISDD BCC rate of 0.78% differed from the conventional method BCC rate of 4.06% observed during the intervention period (chi-squared test P < 0.00001). The ISDD group attained a sub-1% BCC rate to satisfy the intervention objective.

Microbiological Impacts of Decontamination of Stethoscopes and Assessment of Disinfecting Practices among Physicians in Pakistan: A Quality Improvement Survey

The study was conducted to determine bacterial contamination of stethoscopes used by doctors before and after disinfecting with isopropyl alcohol and analyze their practices of disinfecting stethoscopes. Samples from stethoscopes were taken before and after disinfecting with 70% isopropyl alcohol swab with the help of a sterile swab. All swabs were inoculated on Blood and MacConkey agar plates and were examined for growth. Stethoscopes of 78 doctors were sampled which included 45 (58%) males and 33 (42%) females. Before decontamination of diaphragms with isopropyl alcohol, 27 (34.6%) diaphragms had "growth" while 51 (65.4%) had "no growth." After decontamination with isopropyl alcohol, 5 (6.4%) had "growth" while 73 (93.6%) had "no growth." The most common microorganism isolated from stethoscopes' diaphragms was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE), that is, 14 out of 78 (17.9%). The survey also evaluated factors associated with contamination of stethoscopes. Most doctors 71(91%) believe that stethoscopes can be a source of infection and 55.1% (N = 43) responded that both diaphragm and bell of stethoscopes can transmit infections. Many doctors (41%, N = 32) reported that "forgetfulness/laziness" was the barrier which they faced regarding stethoscope hygiene followed by "lack of time" (21.8%, N = 17). The contamination rate (66.6%) is highest in those doctors who are using their stethoscopes for 3-5 years. Of them, 30 doctors (38.5%) never decontaminated their stethoscopes among which 17 had growth in their stethoscopes before cleaning with isopropyl alcohol, while three had growth even after decontamination. Most doctors used sanitizer (29.5%) and isopropyl alcohol (25.6%) as cleaning agents.

Impact of sterile gloves on blood-culture contamination rates: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Reducing the blood-culture contamination rate is a constant challenge for health services. This study aimed to analyze whether blood-culture (BC) collection using sterile gloves reduces the contamination rate when compared to the non-sterile gloves, and to compare baseline and intervention periods.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial, performed in an intensive care unit in Brazil and paired in two groups: sterile (BCs obtained with modified sterile technique: only sterile gloves; no fenestrated drape or dedicated sterile collection kit) and clean (clean technique: usual care with non-sterile gloves). Two paired blood samples were obtained from each patient by trained and calibrated nurses. BCs were processed by conventional microbiological methods and the results were issued by blinded microbiologists.

RESULTS

There was no difference (P = 1.00) in the contamination rate of BC between the sterile (1%) and clean (1%) groups. However, there was a significant difference (P = 0.05; relative risk: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.04-0.70) in the contamination rate between baseline (6.1%; 20/330) and intervention (1%; 2/200).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the aseptic care provided in obtaining samples is more important than the sterile technique itself, and highlights the value of standardizing the practices, qualification and calibration of phlebotomists.

Topical Antiseptic Formulations for Skin and Soft Tissue Infections

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are usually acute conditions of inflammatory microbial occupation of the skin layers and underlying soft tissues. SSTIs are one of the most frequent types of infection, typically requiring medical intervention and contribute to morbidity and mortality in both primary care and hospitalised patients. Due to the dramatic rise of antibiotic resistance, antiseptic agents can be potential alternatives for the prevention and treatment of SSTIs. Notably, they are commonly recommended in many global practical guidelines for use in per- and post- operative procedures. A range of antiseptics, including chlorhexidine, triclosan, alcohol, and povidone-iodine, are used and are mainly formulated as traditional, simple dosage forms such as solutions and semi-solids. However, in recent years, there have been studies reporting the potential for nanotechnology in the delivery of antiseptics. In this review, we have collated the scientific literature that focuses on topical antiseptic formulations for prevention and treatment of SSTIs, and have divided findings into traditional and advanced formulations. We conclude that although nanotechnological formulations have demonstrated potential advantages for delivering drugs; nevertheless, there is still scope for traditional formulations and further development of optimised topical formulations to address the rise of antimicrobial resistance.

Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: A Comprehensive Update on the Problem of Blood Culture Contamination and a Discussion of Methods for Addressing the Problem

In this review, we present a comprehensive discussion of matters related to the problem of blood culture contamination. Issues addressed include the scope and magnitude of the problem, the bacteria most often recognized as contaminants, the impact of blood culture contamination on clinical microbiology laboratory function, the economic and clinical ramifications of contamination, and, perhaps most importantly, a systematic discussion of solutions to the problem. We conclude by providing a series of unanswered questions that pertain to this important issue.

A simplified blood culture sampling protocol for reducing contamination and costs: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Blood culture contamination carries risks for patients, such as unnecessary antimicrobial therapy and other additional hazards and costs. One method shown to be effective in reducing contamination is initial blood specimen diversion during collection. We hypothesized that initial blood specimen diversion without a designated device or procedure would suffice for reduction in blood culture contamination rate.

METHODS

From 1 September 2017 through to 6 September 2018, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of an initial-specimen diversion technique (ISDT) on the rate of blood-culture contamination by changing the order of sampling using regular vacuum specimen tubes instead of commercially available sterile diversion devices. We included adults from whom the treating physician planned to take blood cultures and additional blood chemistry tests. Additionally, we evaluated the potential economic benefits of an ISDT. This was a researcher-initiated trial, Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03088865.

RESULTS

In all, 756 patients were enrolled. This method, compared with the standard procedure in use at our medical centre, reduced contamination by 66% (95% CI 17%-86%), from 20/400 (5%) with the standard method to 6/356 (1.6%) with the ISDT, without compromising detection of true bloodstream infection and at no additional cost. Hospital-wide implementation of ISDT was associated with a 1.1% saving in hospitalization days.

CONCLUSIONS

We offer this novel approach as a simple, cost-effective measure to reduce risks to patient safety from contaminated blood cultures, without the need for using costly devices.

Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections for Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis: What the Orthopaedic Provider Needs to Know

Intra-articular corticosteroid injections have been used for decades in the management of symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee and remain a common practice. The pain relief from a steroid injection is thought to work by reducing inflammation within the arthritic knee. Substantial variability remains among providers with regard to the technique used to perform the procedure, including the site of the injection, the medications injected, and the level of sterility. The success of steroid injections in relieving arthritic knee pain most often occurs in the short term. However, the efficacy of intra-articular corticosteroid injections varies within the published literature. The latest American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guideline does not support conclusive recommendations about the use of intra-articular corticosteroid injections for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Providers should be aware of the adverse effects and potential complications of these injections when using them in clinical practice.

The effectiveness of interventions to reduce peripheral blood culture contamination in acute care: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Blood cultures are an integral part of the diagnosis of bacteremia in unwell patients. The treatment of bacteremia involves the rapid and accurate identification of the causative agent grown from the blood cultures collected. Contamination of blood cultures with non-pathogenic microbes such as skin commensals causes false positive results and subsequent unnecessary and potentially harmful interventions. While guidelines for blood culture quality recommend no more than 2-3% contamination rate, rates up to 12% are reported in the literature. There have been a number of methods proposed to reduce the contamination of blood cultures, including educational interventions, changing of skin cleansing preparations and introduction of blood culture collection packs in acute care settings. This protocol outlines methods to identify and evaluate interventions to reduce blood culture contamination in the acute care setting.

METHODS

The reviewers will conduct a systematic search of literature in CINHAL, PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central register of controlled trials. Unpublished works will be identified in ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Articles will be assessed for relevance based on their title and abstract. Remaining relevant citations will have their full text retrieved and assessed against eligibility criteria. All studies that meet the eligibility criteria will have their methodological quality appraised. Assessments for relevance and methodological quality will be conducted independently by two reviewers. If appropriate, data will be analysed using the Mantel-Haenszel method under a random effects model. Heterogeneity of the studies will be assessed using the I 2 and chi-squared statistic. Meta-analysis will be attempted if the data is suitable.

DISCUSSION

This review will identify and summarise the interventions previously described in the literature aimed at reducing peripherally collected blood culture contamination rates in acute care. These findings have the potential to lead to multifaceted interventions based on previous evidence to reduce blood culture contamination in the acute setting. Reductions in the proportion of contaminated blood cultures have the potential to save money, unrequired treatment (particularly antimicrobials) and hospital bed days.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

In accordance with guidelines outlined in the PRISMA-P methodology, this protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on December 8, 2017, and last updated on January 4, 2018 (registration number CRD42017081650).