↓ Skip to main content

Exploring surface cleaning strategies in hospital to prevent contact transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Exploring surface cleaning strategies in hospital to prevent contact transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-2120-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hao Lei, Rachael M. Jones, Yuguo Li

Abstract

Cleaning of environmental surfaces in hospitals is important for the control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and other hospital-acquired infections transmitted by the contact route. Guidance regarding the best approaches for cleaning, however, is limited. In this study, a mathematical model based on ordinary differential equations was constructed to study MRSA concentration dynamics on high-touch and low-touch surfaces, and on the hands and noses of two patients (in two hospitals rooms) and a health care worker in a hypothetical hospital environment. Two cleaning interventions - whole room cleaning and wipe cleaning of touched surfaces - were considered. The performance of the cleaning interventions was indicated by a reduction in MRSA on the nose of a susceptible patient, relative to no intervention. Whole room cleaning just before first patient care activities of the day was more effective than whole room cleaning at other times, but even with 100% efficiency, whole room cleaning only reduced the number of MRSA transmitted to the susceptible patient by 54%. Frequent wipe cleaning of touched surfaces was shown to be more effective that whole room cleaning because surfaces are rapidly re-contaminated with MRSA after cleaning. Wipe cleaning high-touch surfaces was more effective than wipe cleaning low-touch surfaces for the same frequency of cleaning. For low wipe cleaning frequency (≤3 times per hour), high-touch surfaces should be targeted, but for high wipe cleaning frequency (>3 times per hour), cleaning should target high- and low-touch surfaces in proportion to the surface touch frequency. This study reproduces the observations from a field study of room cleaning, which provides support for the validity of our findings. Daily whole room cleaning, even with 100% cleaning efficiency, provides limited reduction in the number of MRSA transmitted to susceptible patients via the contact route; and should be supplemented with frequent targeted cleaning of high-touch surfaces, such as by a wipe or cloth containing disinfectant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 8%
Engineering 7 6%
Other 28 26%
Unknown 27 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,956,053
of 25,656,290 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#523
of 8,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,187
of 423,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#15
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,656,290 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 423,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.