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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Impact of surveillance of hospital-acquired infections on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care units: a quasi-experimental study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc11484 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Bénet, Bernard Allaouchiche, Laurent Argaud, Philippe Vanhems |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The preventive impact of hospital-acquired infection (HAI) surveillance is difficult to assess. Our objective was to investigate the effect of HAI surveillance disruption on ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) incidence. METHODS: A quasi-experimental study with an intervention group and a control group was conducted between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2010 in two intensive care units (ICUs) of a university hospital that participated in a national HAI surveillance network. Surveillance was interrupted during the year 2007 in unit A (intervention group) and was continuous in unit B (control group). Period 1 (pre-test period) comprised patients hospitalized during 2004 to 2006, and period 2 (post-test period) involved patients hospitalized during 2008 to 2010. Patients hospitalized ≥48 hours and intubated during their stay were included. Multivariate Poisson regression was fitted to ascertain the influence of surveillance disruption. RESULTS: A total of 2,771 patients, accounting for 19,848 intubation-days at risk, were studied; 307 had VAP. The VAP attack rate increased in unit A from 7.8% during period 1 to 17.1% during period 2 (P <0.001); in unit B, it was 7.2% and 11.2% for the two periods respectively (P = 0.17). Adjusted VAP incidence rose in unit A after surveillance disruption (incidence rate ratio = 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 4.47, P = 0.036), independently of VAP trend; no change was observed in unit B. All-cause mortality and length of stay increased (P = 0.028 and P = 0.038, respectively) in unit A between periods 1 and 2. In unit B, no change in mortality was observed (P = 0.22), while length of stay decreased between periods 1 and 2 (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: VAP incidence, length of stay and all-cause mortality rose after HAI surveillance disruption in ICU, which suggests a specific effect of HAI surveillance on VAP prevention and reinforces the role of data feedback and counselling as a mechanism to facilitate performance improvement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Ethiopia | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 7 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,517,312
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,088
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,673
of 186,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#63
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 186,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.