↓ Skip to main content

Ultrasound transducer disinfection in emergency medicine practice

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, April 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Ultrasound transducer disinfection in emergency medicine practice
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13756-016-0110-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Riley Hoyer, Srikar Adhikari, Richard Amini

Abstract

External ultrasound transducer disinfection is common practice in medicine. Unfortunately, clinically significant organisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella pneumonia spread throughout healthcare facilities via direct contact despite disinfection protocols. Ultrasound transducers and coupling gel provide potential vectors for pathogen transmission, especially in immunocompromised and high-risk patient populations. Our objective was to conduct a survey to investigate the variety of cleaning solutions or sanitary wipes used and evaluate current standard practice for transducer disinfection across emergency medicine training programs in the United States. Eighty-three academic emergency medicine programs participated in this study. Eighty-seven percent (95 % CI 80-94 %) of responding programs do not have a mandated protocol or standard contact time for transducer disinfection. Ninety percent (95 % CI 84-96 %) of institutions use disinfectant solution or disinfectant wipes, as the standard of practice, to cleanse ultrasound transducers after every use. Currently, there is a great deal of variability with regard to non-endocavitary transducer disinfection protocols that seems to stem from the vast number of disinfectant products and ultrasound manufacturer disparate recommendations. In order to mitigate risk to patients and reduce health care costs linked to nosocomial infections; healthcare providers, ultrasound companies, and disinfectant manufacturers must develop a universal use disinfectant and a standard protocol for ultrasound device disinfection for noncritical device disinfection in the emergency department.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Postgraduate 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 10 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,384,957
of 24,648,202 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#285
of 1,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,223
of 305,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,648,202 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,398 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. 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 305,778 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.