Multicenter Assessment of Gram Stain Error Rates
- PMID: 26888900
- PMCID: PMC4879281
- DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03066-15
Multicenter Assessment of Gram Stain Error Rates
Erratum in
-
Correction for Samuel et al., Multicenter Assessment of Gram Stain Error Rates.J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Sep;54(9):2405. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01465-16. Epub 2016 Aug 24. J Clin Microbiol. 2016. PMID: 27578160 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
Gram stains remain the cornerstone of diagnostic testing in the microbiology laboratory for the guidance of empirical treatment prior to availability of culture results. Incorrectly interpreted Gram stains may adversely impact patient care, and yet there are no comprehensive studies that have evaluated the reliability of the technique and there are no established standards for performance. In this study, clinical microbiology laboratories at four major tertiary medical care centers evaluated Gram stain error rates across all nonblood specimen types by using standardized criteria. The study focused on several factors that primarily contribute to errors in the process, including poor specimen quality, smear preparation, and interpretation of the smears. The number of specimens during the evaluation period ranged from 976 to 1,864 specimens per site, and there were a total of 6,115 specimens. Gram stain results were discrepant from culture for 5% of all specimens. Fifty-eight percent of discrepant results were specimens with no organisms reported on Gram stain but significant growth on culture, while 42% of discrepant results had reported organisms on Gram stain that were not recovered in culture. Upon review of available slides, 24% (63/263) of discrepant results were due to reader error, which varied significantly based on site (9% to 45%). The Gram stain error rate also varied between sites, ranging from 0.4% to 2.7%. The data demonstrate a significant variability between laboratories in Gram stain performance and affirm the need for ongoing quality assessment by laboratories. Standardized monitoring of Gram stains is an essential quality control tool for laboratories and is necessary for the establishment of a quality benchmark across laboratories.
Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Comment in
-
One Small Step for the Gram Stain, One Giant Leap for Clinical Microbiology.J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Jun;54(6):1416-1417. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00303-16. Epub 2016 Mar 23. J Clin Microbiol. 2016. PMID: 27008876 Free PMC article.
Similar articles
-
Improving Gram stain proficiency in hospital and satellite laboratories that do not have microbiology.Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 Mar 1;55(3):458-461. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2016-0556. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017. PMID: 27658158
-
Development of a standardized Gram stain procedure for bacteria and inflammatory cells using an automated staining instrument.Microbiologyopen. 2020 Sep;9(9):e1099. doi: 10.1002/mbo3.1099. Epub 2020 Jun 27. Microbiologyopen. 2020. PMID: 32592452 Free PMC article.
-
Positive blood cultures: can we always trust the Gram stain?Am J Clin Pathol. 2006 Nov;126(5):671-2. doi: 10.1309/A3A7-34C9-1JHP-HWB6. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006. PMID: 17050062 No abstract available.
-
Is the gram stain useful in the microbiologic diagnosis of VAP? A meta-analysis.Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Aug;55(4):551-61. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis512. Epub 2012 Jun 7. Clin Infect Dis. 2012. PMID: 22677711 Review.
-
Microwave-accelerated cytochemical stains for the image analysis and the electron microscopic examination of light microscopy diagnostic slides.Scanning. 1993 Mar-Apr;15(2):67-80. doi: 10.1002/sca.4950150203. Scanning. 1993. PMID: 7506980 Review.
Cited by
-
Performances of automated digital imaging of Gram-stained slides with on-screen reading against manual microscopy.Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021 Oct;40(10):2171-2176. doi: 10.1007/s10096-021-04233-2. Epub 2021 May 8. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021. PMID: 33963927 Free PMC article.
-
Wash-Free Bacterial Gram-Typing and Photodynamic Inactivation with Long-Chain-Tailed BODIPY Derivatives.Biomater Res. 2024 Sep 3;28:0069. doi: 10.34133/bmr.0069. eCollection 2024. Biomater Res. 2024. PMID: 39228999 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of MicroScan Bacterial Identification Panels for Low-Resource Settings.Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Feb 19;11(2):349. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11020349. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021. PMID: 33669829 Free PMC article.
-
Mycobacterium haemophilum scleritis: two case reports and review of literature.BMC Ophthalmol. 2020 Sep 23;20(1):378. doi: 10.1186/s12886-020-01649-w. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020. PMID: 32967654 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Candida Parapsilosis associated rice bodies in the extensor compartment of the wrist--an emerging finding.Radiol Case Rep. 2019 Oct 26;14(12):1539-1544. doi: 10.1016/j.radcr.2019.09.032. eCollection 2019 Dec. Radiol Case Rep. 2019. PMID: 31709023 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources