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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Video observation of sharps handling and infection control practices during routine companion animal appointments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-015-0503-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maureen E. C. Anderson, J. Scott Weese |
| Abstract |
Infection control in veterinary clinics is important for preventing pathogen spread between patients, staff and the public. There has been no direct evaluation of the use of many basic infection control practices, including sharps handling, environmental cleaning, and personal protective clothing (PPC), in companion animal clinics. The objective of this study was to describe these and other infection control practices associated with routine companion animal appointments in veterinary clinics in Ontario. Video observation of practices was performed in 51 clinics for approximately 3 weeks each as part of another study evaluating the effect of a poster campaign on hand hygiene compliance. Two small wireless surveillance cameras were used: one in an exam room, one in what was considered the most likely location for hand hygiene to be performed outside the exam room following an appointment. Video footage was coded and analyzed for 47 clinics, including 2713 appointments and 4903 individual staff-animal contacts. Recapping of a needle was seen in 84 % (1137/1353) of appointments in which use was observed. Only one apparent needlestick injury (NSI) was seen, during recapping. Exam tables were cleaned and floors were mopped following 76 % (2015/2646) and 7 % (174/2643) of appointments, respectively. Contact time with spray used to clean the exam table ranged from 0-4611 s (mean 39 s, median 9 s). Appropriate PPC was worn for 72 % (3518/4903) of staff-animal contacts. Although there was significant room for improvement in sharps handling behaviours in participating clinics, the number of observed NSIs was low. Contact time with environmental disinfectants and use of PPC could also be improved, as well as other basic infection control practices. Education and motivation of veterinary staff to use these simple measures more effectively could potentially have a significant impact on infection control in veterinary clinics for relatively little cost. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 13 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 23 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 June 2023.
All research outputs
#7,540,794
of 23,666,535 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#611
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,191
of 265,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#17
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,666,535 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,105 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 265,216 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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.