↓ Skip to main content

Preparedness of institutions around the world for managing patients with Ebola virus disease: an infection control readiness checklist

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, June 2015
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 (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Preparedness of institutions around the world for managing patients with Ebola virus disease: an infection control readiness checklist
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13756-015-0061-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ermira Tartari, Benedetta Allegranzi, Brenda Ang, Neville Calleja, Peter Collignon, Joost Hopman, Lily Lang, Lai Chee Lee, Moi Lin Ling, Shaheen Mehtar, Paul A. Tambyah, Andreas Widmer, Andreas Voss

Abstract

In response to global concerns about the largest Ebola virus disease (EVD), outbreak to-date in West Africa documented healthcare associated transmission and the risk of global spread, the International Society of Chemotherapy (ISC) Infection Control Working Group created an Ebola Infection Control Readiness Checklist to assess the preparedness of institutions around the globe. We report data from the electronic checklist that was disseminated to medical professionals from October to December 2014 and identify action needed towards better preparedness levels. Data from 192 medical professionals (one third from Africa) representing 125 hospitals in 45 countries around the globe were obtained through a specifically developed electronic survey. The survey contained 76 specific questions in 7 major sections: Administrative/operational support; Communications; Education and audit; Human resources, Supplies, Infection Prevention and Control practices and Clinical management of patients. The majority of respondents were infectious disease specialists/infection control consultants/clinical microbiologists (75; 39 %), followed by infection control professionals (59; 31 %) and medical doctors of other specialties (17; 9 %). Nearly all (149; 92 %) were directly involved in Ebola preparedness activities. Whilst, 54 % indicated that their hospital would need to handle suspected and proven Ebola cases, the others would subsequently transfer suspected cases to a specialized centre. The results from our survey reveal that the general preparedness levels for management of potentially suspected cases of Ebola virus disease is only partially adequate in hospitals. Hospitals designated for admitting EVD suspected and proven patients had more frequently implemented Infection Control preparedness activities than hospitals that would subsequently transfer potential EVD cases to other centres. Results from this first international survey provide a framework for future efforts to improve hospital preparedness worldwide.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 20%
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 20 24%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 16 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#1,235,040
of 16,534,036 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
#176
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,635
of 238,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,534,036 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 238,614 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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