Wound swab quality grading is dependent on Gram smear screening approach

Abstract

Abstract Superficial skin swab collections are inherently low-quality and may be of little clinical value due to their poor sensitivity and specificity. Clinical microbiology laboratories can use Gram smears to screen and differentiate higher and lower quality specimens to direct the extent of potential pathogen work up, including antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). We compared the impact of two different smear grading approaches to our current reporting practices for superficial wound swab cultures. Two variations of the Q score methodology (low power under 10X (QS10) and high power under 100X (QS100) were compared to our existing oil immersion method (OM100) (100X). We further evaluated the QS100 method by scoring superficial swab smears previously screened by OM100 from cultures submitted between November 2018 and December 2019. No significant difference in the number of low-quality specimens (N = 50) was identified by QS10 or QS100 grading (N = 9; 18%; N = 8; 16% respectively). Among 968 additional QS100 screened smears, 67 (6.9%) low quality swabs were identified and 7.4% fewer organisms (76/1020 organisms) would require reporting with AST. Implementing the Q score for superficial wound swab cultures would provide minimal improvements in their clinical relevance, laboratory quality and efficiency in our laboratory due to the low number of poor-quality swabs received.