↓ Skip to main content

Antimicrobial activity of topical agents against Propionibacterium acnes: an in vitro study of clinical isolates from a hospital in Shanghai, China

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers of Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Antimicrobial activity of topical agents against Propionibacterium acnes: an in vitro study of clinical isolates from a hospital in Shanghai, China
Published in
Frontiers of Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11684-016-0480-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ying Ma, Nanxue Zhang, Shi Wu, Haihui Huang, Yanpei Cao

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the antimicrobial activities of topical agents against Propionibacterium acnes isolated from patients admitted to a hospital in Shanghai, China. The minimal inhibitory concentrations of the cultured P. acnes were determined in accordance with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Susceptibilities to clindamycin and erythromycin were compared in terms of gender, age, disease duration, previous treatment, and disease severity. A total of 69 P. acnes strains were isolated from 98 patients (70.41%). The susceptibility to triple antibiotic ointment (neomycin/bacitracin/polymyxin B) and bacitracin was 100%. The susceptibility to fusidic acid was 92.7%. The resistance rates to neomycin sulfate, erythromycin, and clindamycin were 11.7%, 49.3%, and 33.4%, respectively. The high resistance rate to clindamycin and erythromycin was significantly affected by gender, previous treatment, and disease severity rather than by age and disease duration. Topical antibiotics should not be used separately for long-term therapy to avoid multiresistance. The use of topical antibiotics should be determined by clinicians on the basis of clinical conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 11 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,460,734
of 22,974,684 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers of Medicine
#174
of 351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,434
of 420,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers of Medicine
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,974,684 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 420,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.