BacteremiaNCT07486362
Evaluation of Emergency Medicine Pharmacist Impact on Blood Culture Review Following Emergency Department Discharge
An observational study of Bacteremia, run by Methodist Health System at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Patients are commonly discharged from the Emergency Department(ED) with pending blood culture results. Blood cultures can take up to 48 hours to become positive which is why it is important to notify patients with true positive cultures as soon as possible. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Bacteremia
- How many people
- 146 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 31 Jan 2024to 25 Jan 2025
- How long will I take part?
- 6 Months
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients with a positive blood culture result, collected during the initial ED visit and who were discharged from the ED to the outpatient/long-term care setting prior to a critical blood Groupsculture result.
Who may be able to join
- Patients with a positive blood culture result, collected during the initial ED visit and who were discharged from the ED to the outpatient/long-term care setting prior to a critical blood Groups culture result.
Who cannot join
- Patients admitted to inpatient and patients transferred from ED to another acute care facility.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Clinical Research Institute Methodist Health System
Dallas, Texas, 75203
About this study
Patients are commonly discharged from the Emergency Department(ED) with pending blood culture results. Blood cultures can take up to 48 hours to become positive which is why it is important to notify patients with true positive cultures as soon as possible. Delay in notification can lead to other serious complications such as sepsis, septic shock, and death.
The American College of Emergency Physicians states pharmacists serve a critical role in ensuring efficient, safe, and effective medication use in the ED and advocates for health systems to support dedicated roles for pharmacists within the ED. Pharmacists help to decrease the workload on the healthcare team, especially in the ED where there is high volume and acuity.Emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP) play a significant role in the optimization of therapy, medication safety, and reducing costs.
There is strong evidence for the positive impact EMPs have on microbiological culture review. Overall, pharmacist review of late cultures results in higher rates of appropriate antimicrobial therapy and decreased missed interventions.These prior studies focused on the review of microbiological tests, including sexually transmitted infections, urine, and wound cultures; however, there was limited data to support the role of pharmacists evaluating late blood culture results.
Read the detailed description
A multicenter retrospective study will be conducted at Methodist Charlton Medical Center (MCMC) and Methodist Dallas Medical Center (MDMC). The study will be conducted using the EMR to collect data from patients who were discharged and had pending blood cultures from the ED between July 1, 2022 to July 1, 2023. The variables to be collected from the Electronic medical record(EMR) are listed in Appendix B. All blood culture reviews at MCMC are reviewed, acted on, and documented by pharmacists during available hours. All blood cultures reviewed at MDMC are reviewed, acted on, and documented by charge nurses and physicians. The collection of data will begin after study approval is received by the Institutional review board(IRB).
- Conditions
- Bacteremia
- Being tested
- No Intervention
- Medical subject headings
- Bacteremia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
No InterventionOther
No Intervention
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Emergency medicine pharmacist (EMPs) | EMPs, utilizing a Collaborative practice agreements(CPA), will be associated with a significantly shorter time to patient review and notification of positive blood culture compared to a CN-physician review. Receives: Other: No Intervention | |
| Charge nurse (CN's) | To determine the effect of EMPs, utilizing a CPA, on the appropriateness of antibiotic selection upon return admission for bacteremia, reasons for patient return to hospital (i.e., return due to call - expectant, worsening of symptoms - non-expectant, other) compared to the standard CN-physician facilitated process, and rates of inappropriate call backs for reassessment or admissions (i.e., contaminant call backs). Receives: Other: No Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time from an actionable positive blood culture to the time of review and/or patient notification. ult.
Time to patient notification is defined as time until the first attempt to contact the patient regarding the actionable positive res
Measured: 18 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Mar 2026
- Study start31 Jan 2024
- Primary completion20 Jan 2025
- Study completion25 Jan 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for BacteremiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Other
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (actual)
- Target duration
- 6 Months
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Methodist Health System
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Andrew Karpisek, MD, Principal investigator, Methodist Health System
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07486362
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 057.PHA.2023.A
- Status last verified
- Jan 2026
- First submitted
- 26 Mar 2024
- Last updated
- 4 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Emergency Medicine Pharmacist Impact on Blood Culture Review Following Emergency Department Discharge
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07486362
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 057.PHA.2023.A
- Conditions
- Bacteremia
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Methodist Health SystemUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 31 Jan 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Jan 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 25 Jan 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Patients are commonly discharged from the Emergency Department(ED) with pending blood culture results. Blood cultures can take up to 48 hours to become positive which is why it is important to notify patients with true positive cultures as soon as possible. Delay in notification can lead to other serious complications such as sepsis, septic shock, and death.
The American College of Emergency Physicians states pharmacists serve a critical role in ensuring efficient, safe, and effective medication use in the ED and advocates for health systems to support dedicated roles for pharmacists within the ED. Pharmacists help to decrease the workload on the healthcare team, especially in the ED where there is high volume and acuity.Emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP) play a significant role in the optimization of therapy, medication safety, and reducing costs.
There is strong evidence for the positive impact EMPs have on microbiological culture review. Overall, pharmacist review of late cultures results in higher rates of appropriate antimicrobial therapy and decreased missed interventions.These prior studies focused on the review of microbiological tests, including sexually transmitted infections, urine, and wound cultures; however, there was limited data to support the role of pharmacists evaluating late blood culture results.
Detailed description
A multicenter retrospective study will be conducted at Methodist Charlton Medical Center (MCMC) and Methodist Dallas Medical Center (MDMC). The study will be conducted using the EMR to collect data from patients who were discharged and had pending blood cultures from the ED between July 1, 2022 to July 1, 2023. The variables to be collected from the Electronic medical record(EMR) are listed in Appendix B. All blood culture reviews at MCMC are reviewed, acted on, and documented by pharmacists during available hours. All blood cultures reviewed at MDMC are reviewed, acted on, and documented by charge nurses and physicians. The collection of data will begin after study approval is received by the Institutional review board(IRB).
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Other
- Target follow-up
- 6 Months
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Emergency medicine pharmacist (EMPs) | – | Other: No InterventionEMPs, utilizing a Collaborative practice agreements(CPA), will be associated with a significantly shorter time to patient review and notification of positive blood culture compared to a CN-physician review. |
| Charge nurse (CN's) | – | Other: No InterventionTo determine the effect of EMPs, utilizing a CPA, on the appropriateness of antibiotic selection upon return admission for bacteremia, reasons for patient return to hospital (i.e., return due to call - expectant, worsening of symptoms - non-expectant, other) compared to the standard CN-physician facilitated process, and rates of inappropriate call backs for reassessment or admissions (i.e., contaminant call backs). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients with a positive blood culture result, collected during the initial ED visit and who were discharged from the ED to the outpatient/long-term care setting prior to a critical blood Groupsculture result.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with a positive blood culture result, collected during the initial ED visit and who were discharged from the ED to the outpatient/long-term care setting prior to a critical blood Groups culture result.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients admitted to inpatient and patients transferred from ED to another acute care facility.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| No InterventionNo Intervention | Other | Charge nurse (CN's), Emergency medicine pharmacist (EMPs) |
Primary outcome
Time from an actionable positive blood culture to the time of review and/or patient notification. ult.
Time frame: 18 months
Time to patient notification is defined as time until the first attempt to contact the patient regarding the actionable positive res
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Aug 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Bacteremia
RecruitingObservational study
Study of the Nasal Intracellular Reservoir of Staphylococcus Aureus in Patients With S. Aureus Bacteremia
Bacteria Infection Mechanism
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Oral Switch in Bloodstream Infections in Immunocompromised Children
Bloodstream Infection, Bloodstream Infection Due to Central Venous Catheter
Not yet recruiting
Evaluation of an AI-Assisted Tool for CLABSI Surveillance at VA Medical Centers
Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI), Bacteremia
RecruitingPhase 2
Combination Cefazolin With Ertapenem for Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia
Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia, Staphylococcus Aureus Septicemia
RecruitingObservational study
Middle East Study of Infections in Patients With Hematological Malignancies
Hematological Malignancy, Hematopoetic Stem Cell Transplantation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Andrew Karpisek, MD principal investigator
Methodist Health System
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Bacteremia, run by Methodist Health System at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time from an actionable positive blood culture to the time of review and/or patient notification. ult. (time frame: 18 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Aug 2026.