↓ Skip to main content

Factors contributing to airborne particle dispersal in the operating room

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Factors contributing to airborne particle dispersal in the operating room
Published in
BMC Surgery, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12893-017-0275-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chieko Noguchi, Hironobu Koseki, Hidehiko Horiuchi, Akihiko Yonekura, Masato Tomita, Takashi Higuchi, Shinya Sunagawa, Makoto Osaki

Abstract

Surgical-site infections due to intraoperative contamination are chiefly ascribable to airborne particles carrying microorganisms. The purpose of this study is to identify the actions that increase the number of airborne particles in the operating room. Two surgeons and two surgical nurses performed three patterns of physical movements to mimic intraoperative actions, such as preparing the instrument table, gowning and donning/doffing gloves, and preparing for total knee arthroplasty. The generation and behavior of airborne particles were filmed using a fine particle visualization system, and the number of airborne particles in 2.83 m(3) of air was counted using a laser particle counter. Each action was repeated five times, and the particle measurements were evaluated through one-way analysis of variance multiple comparison tests followed by Tukey-Kramer and Bonferroni-Dunn multiple comparison tests for post hoc analysis. Statistical significance was defined as a P value ≤ .01. A large number of airborne particles were observed while unfolding the surgical gown, removing gloves, and putting the arms through the sleeves of the gown. Although numerous airborne particles were observed while applying the stockinet and putting on large drapes for preparation of total knee arthroplasty, fewer particles (0.3-2.0 μm in size) were detected at the level of the operating table under laminar airflow compared to actions performed in a non-ventilated preoperative room (P < .01). The results of this study suggest that surgical staff should avoid unnecessary actions that produce a large number of airborne particles near a sterile area and that laminar airflow has the potential to reduce the incidence of bacterial contamination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Master 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 23 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Unspecified 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 26 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,467,628
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#382
of 1,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,375
of 313,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,330 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 313,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.