Clinical Impact of Rapid Identification of Positive Blood Cultures vs. Internal Laboratory Standard
Clinical Impact of Rapid Identification of Positive Blood Cultures vs. Internal Laboratory Standard
In this before-after study, different new methods for bacterial species identification from
 positive blood cultures will be compared towards historic controls. All samples are analyzed
 within the routine workflow for bacterial species identification and antibiotic resistance
 profiling. Patients with positive blood cultures from 2016 to 2018 receiving a conventional
 identification methods (controls) will be compared to patients from 2018 and 2019 with a new
 identification method (cases). The conventional identification method consisted in general of
 an over-night subculture and subsequent identification of the bacterial pathogen using either
 biochemical profiling or Matrix-assisted Laser-Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight
 (MALDI-TOF MS). The new identification of positive blood cultures methods include (i) either
 the newly introduced Biofire FilmArray© Blood Culture Identification (BCID) panel or (ii) in
 a subset of patients whole genome sequencing (WGS) approaches.
Inclusion Criteria:

 -  patients with positive blood cultures hospitalized between August 2016 and October
 2019

 -  documented refusal of the general consent

 Exclusion Criteria:

 -  outpatients

 -  patients hospitalized in other hospitals

 -  patients with known bacteremia diagnosed in another hospital