| Title |
Microbial Epidemiology of Infectious Endocarditis in the Intravenous Drug Abuse Population: A Retrospective Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infectious Diseases and Therapy, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40121-019-0232-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William C. Lorson, R. Eric Heidel, Mahmoud A. Shorman |
| Abstract |
The microbial epidemiology differs between infective endocarditis (IE) patients with and without a history of injection drug use. We set out to determine the prevalence and microbial epidemiology of infective endocarditis in our region, the Southeastern USA, to determine if any changes need to be made in empiric antimicrobial treatment. The electronic medical record was reviewed for patients with IE between January 2013 and July 2017, which revealed 299 cases. The cases were then sorted between patients with and without a history of injection drug use. The growth of their initial set of blood cultures and side of cardiac involvement were then recorded. Statistical analyses were run on the data sets. There were statistically significant effects associated with both methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas species infections occurring more often in individuals with active injection drug use, while streptococcus and enterococcus infections were more likely to occur in the population of individuals who do not inject drugs. In IE patients who use or are suspected of injection drug use, first-line broad-spectrum antibiotics with excellent MRSA and Pseudomonas coverage are essential. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Russia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 31% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 31% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#13,119,167
of 23,124,001 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#303
of 702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,150
of 437,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,124,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 437,851 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.