↓ Skip to main content

Epidemiology of sepsis in intensive care units in Turkey: a multicenter, point-prevalence study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
32 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 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
Epidemiology of sepsis in intensive care units in Turkey: a multicenter, point-prevalence study
Published in
Critical Care, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2013-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nur Baykara, Halis Akalın, Mustafa Kemal Arslantaş, Volkan Hancı, Çiğdem Çağlayan, Ferda Kahveci, Kubilay Demirağ, Canan Baydemir, Necmettin Ünal, Sepsis Study Group

Abstract

The prevalence and mortality of sepsis are largely unknown in Turkey, a country with high antibiotic resistance. A national, multicenter, point-prevalence study was conducted to determine the prevalence, causative microorganisms, and outcome of sepsis in intensive care units (ICUs) in Turkey. A total of 132 ICUs from 94 hospitals participated. All patients (aged > 18 years) present at the participating ICUs or admitted for any duration within a 24-h period (08:00 on January 27, 2016 to 08:00 on January 28, 2016) were included. The presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), severe sepsis, and septic shock were assessed and documented based on the consensus criteria of the American College of Chest Physicians and Society of Critical Care Medicine (SEPSIS-I) in infected patients. Patients with septic shock were also assessed using the SEPSIS-III definitions. Data regarding demographics, illness severity, comorbidities, microbiology, therapies, length of stay, and outcomes (dead/alive during 30 days) were recorded. Of the 1499 patients included in the analysis, 237 (15.8%) had infection without SIRS, 163 (10.8%) had infection with SIRS, 260 (17.3%) had severe sepsis without shock, and 203 (13.5%) had septic shock. The mortality rates were higher in patients with severe sepsis (55.7%) and septic shock (70.4%) than those with infection alone (24.8%) and infection + SIRS (31.2%) (p < 0.001). According to SEPSIS-III, 104 (6.9%) patients had septic shock (mortality rate, 75.9%). The respiratory system (71.6%) was the most common site of infection, and Acinetobacter spp. (33.7%) were the most common isolated pathogen. Approximately, 74.9%, 39.1%, and 26.5% of Acinetobacter, Klebsiella, and Pseudomonas spp. isolates, respectively, were carbapenem-resistant, which was not associated with a higher mortality risk. Age, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score at ICU admission, sequential organ failure assessment score on study day, solid organ malignancy, presence of severe sepsis or shock, Candida spp. infection, renal replacement treatment, and a nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:4 (compared with a nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:2) were independent predictors of mortality in infected patients. A high prevalence of sepsis and an unacceptably high mortality rate were observed in Turkish ICUs. Although the prevalence of carbapenem resistance was high in Turkish ICUs, it was not associated with a higher risk for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03249246 . Date: August 15, 2017. Retrospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 166 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 12%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Postgraduate 14 8%
Other 13 8%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 56 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 3%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 63 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 16 February 2022.
All research outputs
#818,919
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#608
of 6,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,504
of 324,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#21
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 324,449 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.