↓ Skip to main content

Management and outcomes in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia after implementation of mandatory infectious diseases consult: a before/after study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, December 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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Management and outcomes in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia after implementation of mandatory infectious diseases consult: a before/after study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1296-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leslie Martin, Miriam Tova Harris, Annie Brooks, Cheryl Main, Dominik Mertz

Abstract

Infectious disease (ID) consultations have been shown to increase adherence to guidelines and decrease mortality for patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). Here, we assessed the impact of a mandatory ID consultation policy for SAB. We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive adult patients with SAB at two tertiary care teaching hospitals in Hamilton, ON, Canada. Mandatory ID consults for SAB were implemented on January 1(st) 2012. We compared SAB cases in 2011 (control group) with those in 2012 (intervention group). Outcomes included adherence to the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines and patient outcomes. We reviewed 128 SAB cases in 2011 and 124 in 2012. The majority of S. aureus were methicillin-susceptible (97/128, 75.8 % in 2011 and 100/124, 80.6 % in 2012). ID involvement increased significantly from 93/128 (72.7 %) in 2011, to 103/124 (83.1 %) in 2012 (odds ratio [OR] 1.9, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.1-3.3, p = 0.047). There was also a significant decrease in the median time to ID involvement from 2 days to 1 (p = 0.001). In patients who survived the minimum treatment course (greater than 13 days), there was a significant improvement in adherence to IDSA guidelines in 2012 (65/102, 63.7 % vs. 77/96, 80.2 %; OR 2.3, 95 % CI 1.2-4.4, p = 0.01). Mortality and SAB relapse rates were similar in both groups. Creating an automated ID consultation for SAB led to an increase in involvement of ID, a significant decrease in time to ID involvement, and better adherence to IDSA guidelines. The study was not sufficiently powered to detect significant changes in mortality and SAB relapse rates.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 20%
Other 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 21 December 2015.
All research outputs
#4,181,246
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,346
of 7,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,451
of 390,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#20
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. 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 390,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.