BMC Infectious Diseases (Oct 2022)

Blood culture utilization practices among febrile and/or hypothermic inpatients

  • Kap Sum Foong,
  • Satish Munigala,
  • Stephanie Kern-Allely,
  • David K Warren

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07748-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Predictors associated with the decision of blood culture ordering among hospitalized patients with abnormal body temperature are still underexplored, particularly non-clinical factors. In this study, we evaluated the factors affecting blood culture ordering in febrile and hypothermic inpatients. Methods We performed a retrospective study of 15,788 adult inpatients with fever (≥ 38.3℃) or hypothermia (< 36.0℃) from January 2016 to December 2017. We evaluated the proportion of febrile and hypothermic episodes with an associated blood culture performed within 24h. Generalized Estimating Equations were used to determine independent predictors associated with blood culture ordering among febrile and hypothermic inpatients. Results We identified 21,383 abnormal body temperature episodes among 15,788 inpatients (13,093 febrile and 8,290 hypothermic episodes). Blood cultures were performed in 36.7% (7,850/ 21,383) of these episodes. Predictors for blood culture ordering among inpatients with abnormal body temperature included fever ≥ 39℃ (adjusted odd ratio [aOR] 4.17, 95% confident interval [CI] 3.91–4.46), fever (aOR 3.48, 95% CI 3.27–3.69), presence of a central venous catheter (aOR 1.36, 95% CI 1.30–1.43), systemic inflammatory response (SIRS) plus hypotension (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26–1.40), SIRS (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.20–1.31), admission to stem cell transplant / medical oncology services (aOR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04–1.14), and detection of abnormal body temperature during night shift (aOR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03–1.09) or on the weekend (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01–1.08). Conclusion Blood culture ordering for hospitalized patients with fever or hypothermia is multifactorial; both clinical and non-clinical factors. These wide variations and gaps in practices suggest opportunities to improve utilization patterns.

Keywords