↓ Skip to main content

Vascular catheter colonization: surveillance based on culture of needleless connectors

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Vascular catheter colonization: surveillance based on culture of needleless connectors
Published in
Critical Care, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1334-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Jesús Pérez-Granda, María Guembe, Raquel Cruces, Emilio Bouza

Abstract

Superficial culture has a high negative predictive value in the assessment of catheter tip colonization (CC) and catheter-related bloodstream infection (C-RBSI). However, the process of hub culture requires the hubs to be swabbed, and this carries a risk of dislodging the biofilm. At present, most catheter hubs are closed by needleless connectors (NCs) that are periodically replaced. Our objective was to compare the yield of SC (skin + hub culture) with that of skin + NC culture in the assessment of CC and C-RBSI. During 5 months, we included the patients on the Major Heart Surgery ICU when a central venous catheter (CVC) remained in place ≥7 days after insertion. SCs were taken simultaneously when the NC was withdrawn and processed by the semi-quantitative method, even when the catheter was not removed. All catheter tips were cultured. All NCs belonging to a single catheter lumen were individually flushed with 100 μl of brain-heart infusion (BHI) broth. We considered the lumen to be colonized when ≥1 NC culture from the lumen flush was positive. We collected a total of 60 catheters. The overall CC rate was 15.0 %, and we confirmed two episodes of C-RBSI. The validity values after the comparison of SCs with skin + NC culture for prediction of CC were the following: sensitivity 66.7 % vs. 77.8 %, and negative predictive value 93.6 % vs. 93.1 %. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for prediction of C-RBSI was 100 % for both SC and skin + NC culture. The combination of skin and flushed NC culture can be an alternative to conventional SC for ruling out CC and C-RBSI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 18%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,547,499
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,712
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,143
of 352,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#97
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 352,953 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.