From the Guidelines
The rate of blood culture contamination is typically expressed as a percentage of all blood cultures with a contaminant, with an acceptable rate being less than 3% 1. When considering the rate of a process, it is essential to understand the context and the specific process being referred to. In the case of blood culture contamination, the rate is a critical quality measure for evaluating the proper technique in obtaining blood cultures.
- The rate of blood culture contamination is usually calculated as the percentage of all blood cultures (sets) with a blood culture contaminant, drawn over a given period.
- A rate of less than 3% is commonly used as the upper limit of acceptable practice, although many groups are recommending a lower rate as an acceptable quality measure 1.
- The definition of blood culture contamination typically includes the isolation of certain bacteria, such as Coagulase-negative staphylococci, Corynebacterium spp., Bacillus sp., Micrococcus sp., and Cutibacterium acnes, from a single blood culture bottle or set. In contrast to other processes, such as chemical reactions, where rates are often expressed as concentration change per unit time, the rate of blood culture contamination is a percentage-based measure.
- Understanding the rate of blood culture contamination is crucial in clinical settings, as it can help identify areas for improvement in blood culture collection techniques and ultimately reduce the risk of false-positive results and unnecessary antibiotic treatment. The most recent and highest-quality study on this topic is from 2024, which provides evidence-based guidelines for reducing blood culture contamination rates 1.
From the FDA Drug Label
The FDA drug label does not answer the question.
From the Research
Rate of Neutropenia
- The rate of neutropenia induced by ceftriaxone and meropenem is extremely rare, with mortalities ranging from 2.5-5% 2.
- There is no direct information on the rate of neutropenia in the provided studies, but it is mentioned that antibiotic-induced neutropenia is uncommon 2.
- The resolution of neutropenia occurred within 48 hours of ceftriaxone and meropenem being discontinued, suggesting a rapid recovery time 2.
Rate of Treatment Failure
- The rate of treatment failure for intravenous push (IVP) ceftriaxone was 37.8%, compared to 19.5% for intravenous piggyback (IVPB) ceftriaxone 3.
- Hospital mortality was more common with IVP ceftriaxone (21.4% vs. 9.5%) 3.
- The rate of treatment failure for meropenem administered via IVP or extended infusion (EI) was not significantly different, but the median time to clinical stability was shorter for the EI group (20.4 vs. 66.2 hours) 4.
Rate of Clinical Stabilization
- The overall achievement of clinical stabilization was not significantly different between IVP and EI meropenem (48% vs. 44%) 4.
- The median time to clinical stability was shorter for the EI group (20.4 vs. 66.2 hours) 4.
- EI administration was associated with shorter hospital (13 vs. 17 days) and ICU (6 vs. 9 days) lengths of stay 4.