↓ Skip to main content

Dangerous practices in a hemodialysis unit in Vietnam identify from mixed methods

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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
Dangerous practices in a hemodialysis unit in Vietnam identify from mixed methods
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2290-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Minh Cuong Duong, Mary-Louise McLaws

Abstract

Non-compliance with infection control practices poses a serious risk to patients receiving chronic hemodialysis. We aimed to identify the type and frequency of non-compliance with infection control practices in a hemodialysis unit in Vietnam where a large outbreak of hepatitis C infection had occurred. Mixed methods approach included observations and discussions of non-compliance with all 12 nurses at the Hemodialysis Unit, District-6 Hospital in Ho Chi Minh City. Observations of nursing care activities were made between September 2013 and January 2014. Compliance with hand hygiene and glove use during nursing care activities were classified according to the potential for a serious risk of transmission of infection and reported as percentages. Each nurse was expected to provide 11 nursing care activities to three patients assigned per hemodialysis sessions. Activities were to be given on an individual patient-centered care basis, that is, one patient was to receive all 11 activities by their assigned nurse. On completion of the observations all nurses were enrolled in a focus group where observed non-compliance was discussed and transcripts were examined for themes. Hand hygiene compliance rate was low (27%, 95%CI 25%-28%, 1633/6140) regardless of classification of seriousness of risk from this breach. Although glove use (76%, 95%CI 74-78%, 1211/1586) and other personal protective equipment use (81%, 95%CI 78%-83%, 773/959) were high gloves were observed to be reused with multiple patients during a single nursing care activity provided to consecutive patients. Nurses explained the breakdown of providing nursing care activities on an individual patient-centered basis was a response to limited supply of gloves and hand hygiene facilities and was exacerbated by nursing being co-opted by overly demanding patients to provide services without delay. The adaption by the nurses to provide 11 single care activities to multiple consecutive patients in the absence of changing gloves and low hand hygiene compliance was potentially the central risk factor that facilitated the hepatitis C outbreak. Patient-centered care needs to be enforced to minimize multiple nurse-patient contacts that are associated with non-compliance classified as serious risk of infection transmission. Nurse empowerment to resist unreasonable patient demands may also be pivotal to assisting their compliance with hand hygiene and single patient-centered care. An audit program to measure infection control resources and practices may facilitate enforcement of the guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 13%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 33 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 31 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 17%
Psychology 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 37 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 30 May 2017.
All research outputs
#1,532,125
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#374
of 7,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,600
of 311,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#13
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 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 7,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 311,246 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 155 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 91% of its contemporaries.