Skip to content
Research Lab

The “Standard” for Blood Culture Contamination is Changing

~1.4 million patients are potentially impacted each year by a misdiagnosis of sepsis.11 We can do better.

Training and Education on “Best Practices” Alone Will Not Solve the Problem

Clinicians rely on blood culture results for patient treatment decisions, and hospitals and healthcare systems spend considerable efforts training and educating on skin preparation and aseptic techniques. While these best practices are important, contamination caused by sources outside of the nurse or phlebotomist’s control can still occur, resulting in inaccurate or false-positive results and other negative outcomes.12

Human Factors

Risk of touch-point contamination during assembly, preparation of supplies, and skin prep.

Skin Flora (microorganisms)

You can disinfect but not sterilize the skin. Up to 20% of skin flora remains visible in the keratin layer of the skin even after skin prep.

Skin Plugs & Fragments

will enter the culture specimen bottle and commonly will contain viable microorganisms (when present).

The Impact

Unnecessary Antibiotic Administration

Increases patient risk for Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI)13

Can cause Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), with reported risks as high as 36%14

Extended Patient Stay and Unnecessary Tests

Extended hospital stay of 2.0 to 2.4 days increases exposure to Hospital-Acquired Infections (HAIs) and Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HACs)15

Can result in unneeded tests for 35% to 50% of positive blood cultures16

SECONDARY INFECTION

3 Million +

antibiotic-resistant and C. difficile infections each year and 48,000 people die based on the CDC's 2019 report27

ADVERSE DRUG EFFECTS

1 in 5 Patients

experience adverse drug event (ADE) associated with antibiotic administration in acute care hospital setting28

WASTED RESOURCES

$6 billion +

is spent by our healthcare system each year on unnecessary treatment associated with false-positive blood culture results49

Alternative Blood Diversion Methods are Ineffective in Preventing Contamination

Manual Diversion (Waste Tube)

Unproven to Achieve Sustained Reductions
Peer-reviewed controlled clinical studies have not demonstrated sustained reductions and many hospitals have reported an increase in contamination rates18

Waste Tube Challenges
Difficult, if not impossible, to disinfect waste tube top leading to the risk of cross-contamination of both culture bottles

Additional Steps, Touchpoint Contamination
Assembly of supplies and at least 6 additional steps can lead to contamination risks and human error

Passive Diversion Device

Unproven Diversion Volume
No controlled, prospective clinical studies published in national peer-reviewed medical journals on 0.15mL diversion volume

Unproven Effectiveness for Peripheral Intravenous (PIV) Starts
No known, validated clinical data supporting effectiveness and reliable, functional performance for use with PIV starts

Risk of Sidelined Blood Mixing with Specimen
Sideline design allows sidelined blood to mix with culture specimen

Susceptible to Bypassing Diversion
Passive diversion is dependent upon timing of bottle inoculation

Steripath System

Elevating the Standard in Sepsis Testing Accuracy

  • Reduction in false-positive blood culture results by up to 100% 19
  • 10-month [11,202 blood culture sets] sustained contamination rate as low as 0.0% 19
  • Positive predictive value as high as 97% 20
  • Reduction in vancomycin DOT as much as 31% 21
  • Shorten length of stay by average of 2.2 days (P=0.0001) 22
  • Decrease annual costs by an average of $1.9M 23
Mission to zero

We’re on a mission to improve the diagnostic accuracy and timeliness of sepsis test results.

Join The Mission

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

Read our privacy policy