Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
medicine
How is post-mortem microbiology appraised by pathologists? Results from a practice survey conducted by ESGFOR
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Volume 36, No. 8, Year 2017
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Post-mortem microbiology (PMM) is an important tool in forensic pathology, assisting to determine the cause and manner of death. However, there is a lack of standardisation of PMM sampling. In order to get a better insight into the methods used, the available technical options and developmental needs, ESCMID Study Group for Forensic and Postmortem Microbiology (ESGFOR) members designed a survey aimed at pathologists regarding common practices of PMM in clinical and forensic autopsies. Multiple choice questions were developed based on Cumulative Techniques and Procedures in Clinical Microbiology (Cumitech). The questionnaire was sent to pathologists mainly across Europe and Turkey using SurveyMonkey. The survey had 147 respondents. Although all pathologists were aware of the existence of PMM, 39% (19/49) of the participants were not using it. The three main indications for PMM were: (i) clinical suspicion of an infection not confirmed antemortem (83%), (ii) infectious signs at autopsy (83%) and (iii) as part of a standard protocol for foetal/perinatal or paediatric death (67%). Almost 80% of the participants using PMM stated taking 1–10 samples per case. Of the requested examinations, a general bacteriological culture (96%) and a specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for a particular infectious agent (34%) were most popular. The most frequent samples were: heart blood (66%), peripheral femoral blood (49%), spleen (64%) and lung (56%). Eighty-nine percent of the participants considered PMM a useful resource when investigating the cause of death. Although there are some common uses, this survey indicates that there is a need for improvement towards standardising sampling procedures in PMM. © 2017, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Authors & Co-Authors
Cohen, M. C.
United Kingdom, Sheffield
Sheffield Children's Nhs Foundation Trust
Alberola, Juan
Spain, Valencia
Universitat de València
Farina, Claudio
Italy, Bergamo
Papa Giovanni Xxiii Hospital
Achour, W.
Unknown Affiliation
Andréoletti, Laurent
Unknown Affiliation
Leib, Stephen L.
Unknown Affiliation
Martínez, Miguel J.
Unknown Affiliation
Moore, Catherine
Unknown Affiliation
Moran-Gilad, Jacob
Unknown Affiliation
Poljak, Mario
Unknown Affiliation
Seme, Katja
Unknown Affiliation
Cornaglia, Giuseppe
Italy, Verona
Università Degli Studi Di Verona
Statistics
Citations: 16
Authors: 12
Affiliations: 7
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1007/s10096-017-2943-6
ISSN:
09349723
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study
Study Approach
Quantitative