2006American Journal of Clinical PathologyRequires access

Errors in Interpretation of Gram Stains From Positive Blood Cultures

Kenneth H. Rand, Maria Tillan

Open publisher page 60 citations

Abstract

We reviewed major errors in Gram stain reports from positive blood cultures to identify patterns and potential clinical impact. During a 23-month period, blood cultures were misread for 57 (0.7%) of 8,253 patients. Of 5,885 read as gram-positive cocci, 6 (0.1%) had only gram-negative organisms by culture, 3 of which were Acinetobacter species Of 1,959 read as gram-negative bacilli, 25 (1.3%) had only gram-positive organisms by culture. Of these, 9 were Bacillus and 2 were Clostridium species. Nonrecognition of mixed Gram stains accounted for 28 errors that most often were associated with a reading of gram-positive cocci. In 4 cases, there were delays of 14 hours to 3 days in starting appropriate antibiotic treatment; 2 deaths occurred, although the erroneous Gram stain report probably was not contributory. Pathologists and laboratory personnel need to be aware of these types of misinterpretations and the potential effects on patient outcome.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We reviewed major errors in Gram stain reports from positive blood cultures to identify patterns and potential clinical impact. During a 23-month period, blood cultures were misread for 57 (0.7%) of 8,253 patients. Of 5,885 read as gram-positive cocci, 6 (0.1%) had only gram-negative organisms by culture, 3 of which were Acinetobacter species Of 1,959 read as gram-negative bacilli, 25 (1.3%) had only gram-positive organisms by culture. Of these, 9 were Bacillus and 2 were Clostridium species. Nonrecognition of mixed Gram stains accounted for 28 errors that most often were associated with a reading of gram-positive cocci. In 4 cases, there were delays of 14 hours to 3 days in starting appropriate antibiotic treatment; 2 deaths occurred, although the erroneous Gram stain report probably was not contributory. Pathologists and laboratory personnel need to be aware of these types of misinterpretations and the potential effects on patient outcome.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 60 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We reviewed major errors in Gram stain reports from positive blood cultures to identify patterns and potential clinical impact. During a 23-month period, blood cultures were misread for 57 (0.7%) of 8,253 patients. Of 5,885 read as gram-positive cocci, 6 (0.1%) had only gram-negative organisms by culture, 3 of which were Acinetobacter species Of 1,959 read as gram-negative bacilli, 25 (1.3%) had only gram-positive organisms by culture. Of these, 9 were Bacillus and 2 were Clostridium species. Nonrecognition of mixed Gram stains accounted for 28 errors that most often were associated with a reading of gram-positive cocci. In 4 cases, there were delays of 14 hours to 3 days in starting appropriate antibiotic treatment; 2 deaths occurred, although the erroneous Gram stain report probably was not contributory. Pathologists and laboratory personnel need to be aware of these types of misinterpretations and the potential effects on patient outcome.

Key concepts: Gram staining, Gram-Positive Cocci, Gram, Blood culture, Gram-positive bacteria, Bacilli, Microbiology, Gram-negative bacteria

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Errors in Interpretation of Gram Stains From Positive Blood Cultures — Research Paper | ScholarLens