↓ Skip to main content

A gloves-associated outbreak of imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in an intensive care unit in Guangdong, China

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
A gloves-associated outbreak of imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in an intensive care unit in Guangdong, China
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-0917-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan Ye, Jinglan Shan, Yongbo Huang, Jianchun Li, Changan Li, Xiaoqing Liu, Weiqun He, Yimin Li, Pu Mao

Abstract

Imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (IRAB) is an important cause of hospital-acquired infection. We aimed to describe an outbreak of IRAB infection and to investigate its possible source in an intensive care unit. An environmental investigation was undertaken. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by microdilution. These isolates were genotyped by use of repetitive extragenic palindromic polymerase chain reaction (rep-PCR; DiversiLab). The study included 11 patients infected with IRAB and 14 control patients free of IRAB. Case and control patients were compared for possible predisposing factors. A multifaceted intervention was implemented to control the outbreak. Thirty-nine IRABs were isolated from patients and the environmental surveillance culture in August, November, and December 2011. All isolates were resistant to imipenem. The IRAB strains belonged to seven clones (A-G) by the use of rep-PCR. There were four epidemic clones (D-G) in the outbreak, and Clone D was predominant. For the case-control study, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were susceptible to infection with IRAB. The hospital mortality of the case group was significantly higher than that of the control group. The outbreak strains were transmitted among infected patients and equipment by inappropriate use of gloves. A combination of aggressive infection control measures is essential for preventing recurrent nosocomial outbreaks of IRAB.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 22%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Other 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 9 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,467,461
of 12,219,921 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,616
of 4,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,930
of 325,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#45
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,219,921 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,492 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 325,804 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.