↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of an ultraviolet room disinfection protocol to decrease nursing home microbial burden, infection and hospitalization rates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, March 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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 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
Evaluation of an ultraviolet room disinfection protocol to decrease nursing home microbial burden, infection and hospitalization rates
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2275-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine R. Kovach, Yavuz Taneli, Tammy Neiman, Elaine M. Dyer, Alvin Jason A. Arzaga, Sheryl T Kelber

Abstract

The focus of nursing home infection control procedures has been on decreasing transmission between healthcare workers and residents. Less evidence is available regarding whether decontamination of high-touch environmental surfaces impacts infection rates or resident outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine if ultraviolet disinfection is associated with changes in: 1) microbial counts and adenosine triphosphate counts on high-touch surfaces; and 2) facility wide nursing home acquired infection rates, and infection-related hospitalization. The study was conducted in one 160-bed long-term care facility. Following discharge of each resident, their room was cleaned and then disinfected using a newly acquired ultraviolet light disinfection device. Shared living spaces received weekly ultraviolet light disinfection. Thirty-six months of pretest infection and hospitalization data were compared with 12 months of posttest data. Pre and posttest cultures were taken from high-touch surfaces, and luminometer readings of adenosine triphosphate were done. Nursing home acquired infection rates were analyzed relative to hospital acquired infection rates using analysis of variance procedures. Wilcoxon signed rank tests, The Cochran's Q, and Chi Square were also used. There were statistically significant decreases in adenosine triphosphate readings on all high-touch surfaces after cleaning and disinfection. Culture results were positive for gram-positive cocci or rods on 33% (n = 30) of the 90 surfaces swabbed at baseline. After disinfectant cleaning, 6 of 90 samples (7.1%) tested positive for a gram-positive bacilli, and after ultraviolet disinfection 4 of the 90 samples (4.4%) were positive. There were significant decreases in nursing home acquired relative to hospital-acquired infection rates for the total infections (p = .004), urinary tract infection rates (p = .014), respiratory system infection rates (p = .017) and for rates of infection of the skin and soft tissues (p = .014). Hospitalizations for infection decreased significantly, with a notable decrease in hospitalization for pneumonia (p = .006). This study provides evidence that the pulsed-xenon ultraviolet disinfection device is superior to manual cleaning alone for decreasing microbes on environmental surfaces, as well as decreasing infection rates, and the rates of hospitalization for infection. Results suggest that placing a stronger emphasis on environmental surface disinfection in long-term care facilities may decrease nursing home acquired infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 113 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Master 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 27 24%
Unknown 31 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 15%
Engineering 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Computer Science 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 27 24%
Unknown 35 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 15 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,185,530
of 17,960,381 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#243
of 6,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,081
of 268,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,960,381 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,344 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 268,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them