↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of the decolonization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriers in clinical practice

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, December 2015
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 (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Efficacy of the decolonization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriers in clinical practice
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13756-015-0096-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Sai, C. Laurent, H. Strale, O. Denis, B. Byl

Abstract

Nasal and extra nasal carriage of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) is a pre-existing condition that often leads to invasive MRSA infection, as MRSA colonization is associated with a high risk of acquiring MRSA infection during hospital stays. Decolonization may reduce the risk of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in individual carriers and prevent transmission to other patients. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of two decolonization protocols for newly diagnosed MRSA carriage in hospitalized patients and to assess the impact of decolonization on the rate of MRSA infection. The study population consisted of all patients diagnosed as MRSA-positive between January 2006 and June 2010. Patients diagnosed as carriers were designated as requiring contact precautions by the hospital infection control team. The standing order protocol of the hospital pertaining to decolonization procedures was then applied, and all newly diagnosed patients were administered one of the two decolonization treatments outlined in the hospital protocol, with the exception of MRSA respiratory carriers (MRSA obtained from sputum or other lower respiratory tract samples). The two decolonization treatments consisted of the application of intranasal mupirocin 2 % and washing with chlorhexidine soap (40 mg/mL) (mupi/CHX) or application of intranasal povidone-iodine and washing with povidone-iodine soap (PVPI), with each treatment lasting for 5 days. Success was determined by at least three successive nose swabs and throat and other screened site swabs that tested negative for MRSA before patient discharge. A total of 1150 patients admitted to the hospital were found to be infected or colonized with MRSA. Of the 1150 patients, 268 were prescribed decolonization treatment. 104 out of 268 patients (39 %) were successfully decolonized. There was no significant success after two decolonization failures. MRSA infection rate among the successes and failures were 0.0 and 4.3 %, respectively [P = 0.04]. Our results fit well with the prescription of decolonization based on local strategy protocols but reflect a low rate of successful treatment. Although the success rate of decolonization was not high in our study, the effectiveness of decolonization on the infection rate, justifies the continuation of this strategy, even if a marginal cost is incurred.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Researcher 11 15%
Other 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 33%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 05 April 2022.
All research outputs
#970,845
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#85
of 1,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,353
of 395,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 395,476 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.