Skip to Main Content

++

Make the Diagnosis: Bacteremia

++

Prior Probability of Bacteremia

++

The probability of bacteremia depends on the clinical setting. Two studies have shown a probability of 4.1%-7.0% when assessed among consecutive patients for whom blood cultures were obtained, with true positive:contaminant ratios of 1.6:1 and 0.88:1.1-2 When the clinician has a suspicion that an underlying source may be causing bacteremia, the prior probability should be adjusted to the likelihood of bacteremia for the specific infection. For example, the probability of bacteremia among patients with cellulitis is about 2%, and 13% among patients with community-acquired pneumonia and fever and a requirement for hospitalization, 19%-25% among patients with pyelonephritis, and 53% among those with acute bacterial meningitis.

++

Population in Whom Bacteremia Should Be Considered

++

Bacteremia is considered when patients have fever, chills, leukocytosis, focal infections, or signs of shock without an obvious cause, or when the physician suspects endocarditis.

++

Assessing the Likelihood of Bacteremia

++

As a symptom, a patient's report of fever is an inaccurate predictor of bacteremia, with a likelihood ratio (LR) approaching 1.0. An elevated measured temperature ≥ 38.3°C (summary LR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4) or at a threshold of ≥ 38.5°C (summary LR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0) is not much better as an isolated finding. In febrile patients, the presence or absence of chills is more informative, and the presence of shaking chills may be the most useful finding (Table 89-1). Tachycardia and hypotension have been studied at different thresholds, but generally have LRs < 2.0 and, as isolated findings, have low diagnostic accuracy. Likewise, commonly used laboratory tests (such as for leukocytosis and percentage of banded neutrophils) have been studied at multiple different thresholds with LRs that vary across studies, with most studies showing a positive LR < 2.0.

++
Table Graphic Jump Location
Table 89-1.Useful Findings for Assessing the Likelihood of Bacteremia
++

Because the individual findings have poor diagnostic accuracy, physicians resort to combinations of findings. In a study with 8.2% of patients proven to have bacteremia, a physician's overall impression that the probability of bacteremia was high (≥ 50%) only doubled the likelihood, whereas an assessment that the probability was < 50% only halved the likelihood (see Table 89-1).3 Thus, explicit combinations of findings are typically used to assess ...

Want remote access to your institution's subscription?

Sign in to your MyAccess profile while you are actively authenticated on this site via your institution (you will be able to verify this by looking at the top right corner of the screen - if you see your institution's name, you are authenticated). Once logged in to your MyAccess profile, you will be able to access your institution's subscription for 90 days from any location. You must be logged in while authenticated at least once every 90 days to maintain this remote access.

Ok

About MyAccess

If your institution subscribes to this resource, and you don't have a MyAccess profile, please contact your library's reference desk for information on how to gain access to this resource from off-campus.

Subscription Options

JAMAevidence Full Site: One-Year Subscription

Connect to the full suite of JAMAevidence content and resources including interactive self-assessment, videos, and more.

$495 USD
Buy Now

Pay Per View: Timed Access to all of JAMAevidence

24 Hour Subscription $34.95

Buy Now

48 Hour Subscription $54.95

Buy Now

Pop-up div Successfully Displayed

This div only appears when the trigger link is hovered over. Otherwise it is hidden from view.