↓ Skip to main content

Wound care antiseptics - performance differences against Staphylococcus aureus in biofilm

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Wound care antiseptics - performance differences against Staphylococcus aureus in biofilm
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13028-015-0111-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lene K Vestby, Live L Nesse

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus is commonly isolated from infected wounds both in animals and humans. It is known to be an excellent biofilm former and biofilms are present in as many as 60% of chronic wounds. Despite that the presence of biofilms in infections are common, antiseptics are usually qualified for in vivo testing according to their effect on planktonic cells. As it is well known that bacteria in biofilms are more tolerant to antiseptics than planktonic bacteria, biofilm infections can be difficult to treat. The aim of the study was to compare three different categories of antiseptics, biguanide (chlorhexidine), quaternary ammonium compound (QAC; Pyrisept) and iodine/iodophores (2% iodine liniment), with regards to efficacy in killing S. aureus in biofilm. If there was observed a difference in efficacy between these antiseptics, a second aim was to find the most effective of the three antiseptics. Large differences in the bactericidal effect of the different antiseptics against S. aureus in biofilm were observed in the present study. Iodine treatment was found to be the most effective followed by Pyrisept and chlorhexidine. The bactericidal effect of the different antiseptics used in the present study was found to vary significantly against S. aureus in biofilm. The present study gives valuable knowledge with regards to selecting the antiseptics that are most likely to be successful in treating biofilm infected wounds. This study also contributes to focus attention on the importance of qualifying antiseptics based on results using biofilm bacteria rather than planktonic bacteria.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 22%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 7 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,295,030
of 5,180,722 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#99
of 323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,782
of 160,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,180,722 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 54th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 323 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 160,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.