RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Sending blood cultures in children at low risk of bacteremia can contribute to a cascade of unnecessary antibiotic exposure, adverse effects, and increased costs. We aimed to describe practice variation, clinician beliefs, and attitudes about blood culture testing in critically ill children. DESIGN: Cross-sectional electronic survey. SETTING: Fifteen PICUs enrolled in the Blood Culture Improvement Guidelines and Diagnostic Stewardship for Antibiotic Reduction in Critically Ill Children collaborative, an investigation of blood culture use in critically ill children in the United States. SUBJECTS: PICU clinicians (bedside nurses, resident physicians, fellow physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and attending physicians). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Survey items explored typical blood culture practices, attitudes and beliefs about cultures, and potential barriers to changing culture use in a PICU setting. Fifteen of 15 sites participated, with 347 total responses, 15-45 responses per site, and an overall median response rate of 57%. We summarized median proportions and interquartile ranges of respondents who reported certain practices or beliefs: 86% (73-91%) report that cultures are ordered reflexively; 71% (61-77%) do not examine patients before ordering cultures; 90% (86-94%) obtain cultures for any new fever in PICU patients; 33% (19-61%) do not obtain peripheral cultures when an indwelling catheter is in place; and 64% (36-81%) sample multiple (vs single) lumens of central venous catheters for new fever. When asked about barriers to reducing unnecessary cultures, 80% (73-90%) noted fear of missing sepsis. Certain practices (culture source and indication) varied by clinician type. Obtaining surveillance cultures and routinely culturing all possible sources (each lumen of indwelling catheters and peripheral specimens) are positively correlated with baseline blood culture rates. CONCLUSIONS: There is variation in blood culture practices in the PICU. Fear and reflexive habits are common drivers of cultures. These practices may contribute to over-testing for bacteremia. Further investigation of how to optimize blood culture use is warranted.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Bacteriemia/diagnóstico , Cultivo de Sangre/normas , Adolescente , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Cultivo de Sangre/métodos , Catéteres de Permanencia , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Niño , Preescolar , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Estudios Transversales , Personal de Salud/psicología , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Control de Infecciones/normas , Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo Pediátrico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Single center work demonstrated a safe reduction in unnecessary blood culture use in critically ill children. Our objective was to develop and implement a customizable quality improvement framework to reduce unnecessary blood culture testing in critically ill children across diverse clinical settings and various institutions. METHODS: Three pediatric intensive care units (14 bed medical/cardiac; 28 bed medical; 22 bed cardiac) in 2 institutions adapted and implemented a 5-part Blood Culture Improvement Framework, supported by a coordinating multidisciplinary team. Blood culture rates were compared for 24 months preimplementation to 24 months postimplementation. RESULTS: Blood culture rates decreased from 13.3, 13.5, and 11.5 cultures per 100 patient-days preimplementation to 6.4, 9.1, and 8.3 cultures per 100 patient-days postimplementation for Unit A, B, and C, respectively; a decrease of 32% (95% confidence interval, 25-43%; P < 0.001) for the 3 units combined. Postimplementation, the proportion of total blood cultures drawn from central venous catheters decreased by 51% for the 3 units combined (95% confidence interval, 29-66%; P < 0.001). Notable difference between units included the identity and involvement of the project champion, adaptions of the clinical tools, and staff monitoring and communication of project progress. Qualitative data also revealed a core set of barriers and facilitators to behavior change around pediatric intensive care unit blood culture practices. CONCLUSIONS: Three pediatric intensive units adapted a novel 5-part improvement framework and successfully reduced blood culture use in critically ill children, demonstrating that different providers and practice environments can adapt diagnostic stewardship programs.