Skip to content
Magnolia Medical
Our Products
Healthcare Professionals
Blood Cultures
About
Contact Us

References

  1. Nielsen LE, Nguyen K, Wahl CK, et al. Initial Specimen Diversion Device® reduces blood culture contamination and vancomycin use in academic medical center. J Hosp Infect. 2021;117. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2021.10.017.
  2. Zwang O, Albert RK. Analysis of strategies to improve cost effectiveness of blood cultures. J Hosp Med. 2006;1(5):272-6. doi:10.1002/jhm.115.
  3. Khalili H, Bairami S, Kargar M. Antibiotics induced acute kidney injury: incidence, risk factors, onset time and outcome. Acta Med Iran. 2013;51(12):871-8.
  4. Elyasi S, Khalili H, Dashti-Khavidaki S, Mohammadpour A. Vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity: mechanism, incidence, risk factors and special populations. A literature review. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;68(9):1243-55. doi:10.1007/s00228-012-1259-9.
  5. Bellos I, Karageorgiou V, Pergialiotis V, Perrea DN. Acute kidney injury following the concurrent administration of antipseudomonal β-lactams and vancomycin: a network meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(6):696-705. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.019.
  6. Klucher J, Davis K, Lakkad M, Painter JT, Dare RK. Risk factors and clinical outcomes associated with blood culture contamination. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2022;43(3):291-297. doi:10.1017/ice.2021.111. Epub 2021 Apr 26.
  7. Tompkins LS, Tien V, Madison AN. Getting to zero: impact of a device to reduce blood culture contamination and false-positive central line-associated blood stream infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2022;1-5. doi:10.1017/ice.2022.284.
  8. Doern GV, Carroll KC, Diekema DJ, et al. 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. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2020;33(1):e00009-19. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00009-19.
  9. Geisler BP, Jilg N, Patton RG, Pietzsch JB. Model to evaluate the impact of hospital-based interventions targeting false-positive blood cultures on economic and clinical outcomes. J Hosp Infect. 2019;102(4):438-444. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2019.03.012.
  10. CLSI. Principles and Procedures for Blood Cultures; Approved Guidelines. CLSI document M47-A. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2007.
  11. Khalili H, Bairami S, Kargar M. Antibiotics induced acute kidney injury: incidence, risk factors, onset time and outcome. Acta Med Iran. 2013;51(12):871-8.
  12. Elyasi S, Khalili H, Dashti-Khavidaki S, Mohammadpour A. Vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity: mechanism, incidence, risk factors and special populations. A literature review. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;68(9):1243-55. doi:10.1007/s00228-012-1259-9.
  13. Bellos I, Karageorgiou V, Pergialiotis V, Perrea DN. Acute kidney injury following the concurrent administration of antipseudomonal β-lactams and vancomycin: a network meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(6):696-705. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.019.
  14. Fridkin S, Baggs J, Fagan R, et al. Vital signs: improving antibiotic use among hospitalized patients. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;63(9):194–200.
  15. Skoglund E, Dempsey CJ, Chen H, Garey KW. Estimated clinical and economic impact through use of a novel blood collection device to reduce blood culture contamination in the emergency department: a cost-benefit analysis. J Clin Microbiol. 2019;57(1):e01015-18. doi:10.1128/JCM.01015-18.
  16. Boyce JM, Nadeau J, Dumigan D, et al. Obtaining blood cultures by venipuncture versus from central lines: impact on blood culture contamination rates and potential effect on central line-associated bloodstream infection reporting. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(10):1042-7. doi:10.1086/673142.
  17. Shuman EK, Washer LL, Arndt JL, et al. Analysis of central line-associated bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit after implementation of central line bundles. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(5):551-3. doi:10.1086/652157.
  18. Alahmadi YM, Aldeyab MA, McElnay JC, et al. Clinical and economic impact of contaminated blood cultures within the hospital setting. J Hosp Infect. 2011;77(3):233-6. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2010.09.033.
  19. Gander RM, Byrd L, DeCrescenzo M, Hirany S, Bowen M, Baughman J. Impact of phlebotomy-drawn blood cultures on contamination rates and health care costs in a hospital emergency department. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(4):1021-4. doi:10.1128/JCM.02162-08.
  20. Little JR, Murray PR, Traynor PS, Spitznagel E. A randomized trial of povidone-iodine compared with iodine tincture for venipuncture site disinfection: effects on rates of blood culture contamination. Am J Med. 1999;107(2):119-25. doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00197-7.
  21. Surdulescu S, Utamsingh D, and Shekar S. Phlebotomy teams reduce blood-culture contamination rate and save money. Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1998;6(2):60-2.
  22. Bates DW, Goldman L, Lee TH. Contaminant blood cultures and resource utilization. The true consequences of false-positive results. JAMA. 1991;265(3):365-9. doi:10.1001/jama.1991.03460030071031.
  23. Dunagan WC, Woodward RS, Medoff G, et al. Antimicrobial misuse in patients with positive blood cultures. Am J Med. 1989;87(3):253-9. doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(89)80146-9.
  24. Patton RG, Schmitt T. Innovation for reducing blood culture contamination: initial specimen diversion technique. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(12):4501-3. doi:10.1128/JCM.00910-10.
  25. Binkhamis K, Forward K. Effect of the initial specimen diversion technique on blood culture contamination rates. J Clin Microbiol. 2014;52(3):980-1. doi:10.1128/JCM.02773-13.
  26. Zimmerman FS, Karameh H, Ben-Chetrit E, Zalut T, Assous M, Levin PD. Modification of blood test draw order to reduce blood culture contamination: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(5):1215-1220. doi:10.1093/cid/ciz971.
  27. Design fact as indicated in K222299 (Steripath® Micro Blood Collection System FDA clearance letter).
  28. CLSI. Principles and Procedures for Blood Cultures. 2nd Ed. CLSI Guideline M47. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2022.
  29. CLSI. Collection of Diagnostic Venous Blood Specimens. 7th Ed. CLSI Guideline GP41. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.
  30. CDC. Blood Culture Contamination Prevention Actions: An Overview of Infection Control and Antibiotic Stewardship Programs Working with the Clinical Laboratory. July 2022.
  31. CDC National Email Update to Clinicians. Clinicians: Use this guide to decrease blood culture contamination rates. July 22, 2022.
  32. Indicated for use as a blood collection system that diverts and sequesters the initial specimen prior to collection of a subsequent test sample to reduce the frequency of blood culture contamination when contaminants are present in the initial blood sample compared to blood cultures drawn with standard procedure without manual diversion.
  33. Vanhoy MA, Horigan A, Kaiser J, et al. Emergency Nurses Association (ENA). Clinical practice guideline: prevention of blood culture contamination. 2020.
  34. Gorski LA, Hadaway L, Hagle ME, et al. Infusion therapy standards of practice, 8th edition. J Infus Nurs. 2021 Jan-Feb 01;44(1S Suppl 1): S1-S224.doi: 10.1097/NAN.0000000000000396.
  35. Rupp ME, Cavalieri RJ, Marolf C, Lyden E. Reduction in blood culture contamination through use of Initial Specimen Diversion Device. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;65(2):201-205. doi:10.1093/cid/cix304.
  36. Bell M, Bogar C, Plante J, Rasmussen K, Winters S. Effectiveness of a novel specimen collection system in reducing blood culture contamination rates. J Emerg Nurs. 2018;44(6):570-575. doi:10.1016/j.jen.2018.03.007.
  37. Arenas M, Boseman GM, Coppin JD, Lukey J, Jinadatha C, Navarathna DH. Asynchronous testing of 2 specimen-diversion devices to reduce blood culture contamination: a single-site product supply quality improvement project. J Emerg Nurs. 2021;47(2):256-264.e6. doi:10.1016/j.jen.2020.11.008.
  38. Zimmerman FS, Assous MV, Zevin S, Wiener-Well Y. Reducing blood culture contamination using an Initial Specimen Diversion Device. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(7):822-826. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2018.12.004.
  39. Povroznik MD. Initial Specimen Diversion Device® utilization mitigates blood culture contamination across regional community hospital and acute care facility. Am J Med Qual. 2022. doi:10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000055.
  40. O’Sullivan, D. Steere, L. Reducing false-positive blood cultures using a blood diversion device. Connecticut Medicine. 2019;83(2): 53-56.
  41. Burnie, J. Vining, S. Clinical nurse specialist practice: impact on emergency department blood dulture contamination. Clin Nurse Spec. 2021;35(6):314-317. doi: 10.1097/NUR.0000000000000634.
  42. Rhew, D. Childress, W. Decreasing blood culture contamination rates when using an initial Peripheral IV: implementing the 5 P’s and using a closed system device. Nursing & Primary Care. 2021;5(3):1-6.
  43. House of Representatives passage of H.R. 4355, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2022 (“MILCON-VA”) July 2021
  44. Report, Flow Rate Characterization, UltraTouch (UT) vs Non-UT Needles. D00672 Rev A. Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. 2023. Tests results confirmed that the average flow rates of UT needles are statistically different than average flow rates of non-UT needles, regardless of needle gauge size and ISDD style. Bench test results may not necessarily be indicative of clinical performance.

We use our own and third-party cookies to personalize content and to analyze web traffic.

Read our privacy policy