Table 2.
Body of evidence summary table: phlebotomy teams.
| Study (Quality and Effect Size Ratings) | Population/Sample | Setting | Time period | Results (Blood Culture Contamination Rates) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gander 2009 - Good - Substantial |
3,662 total venipuncture blood cultaaures - Emergency Dept (West): Phlebotomists: 2,012 Non -phlebotomists: 1,650 |
Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, TX; 968 bed tertiary care teaching hospital | 12/2006–12/2007; 5mos. of a 13-mo. period | Phlebotomists: 3.1% Non-phlebotomists: 7.4% OR = 2.51 (CI: 1.84 –3.43) |
| Sheppard 2008 - Good - Substantial |
2,854 total blood cultures-Emergency Dept.: Phlebotomists: 278 Non-phlebotomists: 2,576 (include venipuncture and catheter) |
Emory Crawford Long Hospita, Atlanta, GA; Academic Medical Center | 3 months– no dates reported | Phlebotomists: 1.1% Non-phlebotomists: 5.0% OR = 4.83 (CI: 1.53 –15.28) |
| Surdulescu 1998 - Fair - Substantial |
Venipuncture blood draws with prep kits; Sample size not reported;~6,900 total for 1995; from 1/93–10/93 approx. ½ phlebotomy team draws | St. Luke’s Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; teaching hospital. | 10 months 01/1993–10/1993 | Phlebotomists: 2.6% Non-phlebotomists: 5.6% (p= 0.003) OR = 2.09 (CI: 1.68 –2.61) |
| Weinbaum 1997 -Good - Substantial |
1,164 total blood culture venipuncture draws with prep kits; adult general medical and surgical care Phlebotomists: 956 Non-phlebotomists: 208 |
New York Medical Center Hospital of Queens, Flushing, NY; 487-bed community hospital | No dates reported. Baseline: 3mos.; Intervention: 6 mos. | Phlebotomists: 1.2% Non-phlebotomists: 4.8%, OR = 4.34 (CI: 1.82 –10.36) |
| Unpublished | ||||
| Geisinger Wyoming Valley Hospital 2009 - Good - Substantial |
~7020 total blood cultures; 73% by phlebotomists; non-phlebotomist blood collections include venipuncture and catheter | Geisinger Wyoming Valley Hospital; Wilkes-Barre PA | 9 months (01/2009–09/2009) | Phlebotomists: 1.5% Non-phlebotomists: 4.3% OR = 2.93 (CI: 2.13 –4.02) |
| BODY OF EVIDENCE RATINGS |
# Studies by Quality and Effect Size Ratings 4 Good/Substantial 1 Fair/Substantial |
|||
| Consistency | YES | |||
| Overall Strength | HIGH | |||
Bibliographic information for all studies is provided in Appendix C.