| Title |
Evaluation of Penicillin Allergy in the Hospitalized Patient: Opportunities for Antimicrobial Stewardship
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11882-017-0706-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin R. Chen, David A. Khan |
| Abstract |
Penicillin allergy is often misdiagnosed and is associated with adverse consequences, but testing is infrequently done in the hospital setting. This article reviews historical and contemporary innovations in inpatient penicillin allergy testing and its impact on antimicrobial stewardship. Adoption of the electronic medical record allows rapid identification of admitted patients carrying a penicillin allergy diagnosis. Collaboration with clinical pharmacists and the development of computerized clinical guidelines facilitates increased testing and appropriate use of penicillin and related β-lactams. Education of patients and their outpatient providers is the key to retaining the benefits of penicillin allergy de-labeling. Penicillin allergy testing is feasible in the hospital and offers tangible benefits towards antimicrobial stewardship. Allergists should take the lead in this endeavor and work towards overcoming personnel limitations by partnering with other health care providers and incorporating technology that improves the efficiency of allergy evaluation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 33% |
| Spain | 2 | 11% |
| Romania | 1 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 6% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 61% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 22% |
| Scientists | 3 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 08 June 2019.
All research outputs
#3,066,612
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#117
of 815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,006
of 314,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 815 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 314,825 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.