↓ Skip to main content

Optimization and evaluation of Flexicult® Vet for detection, identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacterial uropathogens in small animal veterinary practice

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Optimization and evaluation of Flexicult® Vet for detection, identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacterial uropathogens in small animal veterinary practice
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13028-015-0165-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Guardabassi, Sandra Hedberg, Lisbeth Rem Jessen, Peter Damborg

Abstract

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common reason for antimicrobial prescription in dogs and cats. The objective of this study was to optimize and evaluate a culture-based point-of-care test for detection, identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacterial uro-pathogens in veterinary practice. Seventy-two urine samples from dogs and cats with suspected UTI presenting to seven veterinary facilities were used by clinical staff and an investigator to estimate sensitivity and specificity of Flexicult Vet A compared to laboratory reference standards for culture and susceptibility testing. Subsequently, the test was modified by inclusion of an oxacillin-containing compartment for detection of methicillin-resistant staphylococci. The performance of the modified product (Flexicult Vet B) for susceptibility testing was evaluated in vitro using a collection of 110 clinical isolates. Bacteriuria was reported by the laboratory in 25 (35 %) samples from the field study. The sensitivity and specificity of Flexicult Vet A for detection of bacteriuria were 83 and 100 %, respectively. Bacterial species were correctly identified in 53 and 100 % of the positive samples by clinical staff and the investigator, respectively. The susceptibility results were interpreted correctly by clinical staff for 70 % of the 94 drug-strain combinations. Higher percentages of correct interpretation were observed when the results were interpreted by the investigator in both the field (76 %) and the in vitro study (94 %). The most frequent errors were false resistance to β-lactams (ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate and cephalotin) in Escherichia coli for Flexicult Vet A, and false amoxicillin-clavulanate resistance in E. coli and false ampicillin susceptibility in Staphylococcus pseudintermedius for Flexicult Vet B. The latter error can be prevented by categorizing staphylococcal strains growing in the oxacillin compartment as resistant to all β-lactams. Despite the shortcomings regarding species identification by clinical staff and β-lactam susceptibility testing of E. coli, Flexicult Vet B (commercial name Flexicult(®) Vet) is a time- and cost-effective point-of-care test to guide antimicrobial choice and facilitate implementation of antimicrobial use guidelines for treatment of UTIs in small animals, provided that clinical staff is adequately trained to interpret the results and that clinics meet minimum standards to operate in-house culture.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sri Lanka 1 1%
Unknown 66 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 22 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 20 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 23 34%
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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#506
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,290
of 295,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#24
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 295,169 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.