↓ Skip to main content

Lights, fluorescence, action—Influencing wound treatment plans including debridement of bacteria and biofilms

Overview of attention for article published in International Wound Journal, May 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 1,246)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
75 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Lights, fluorescence, action—Influencing wound treatment plans including debridement of bacteria and biofilms
Published in
International Wound Journal, May 2023
DOI 10.1111/iwj.14208
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashley Jacob, Laura M. Jones, Raymond J. Abdo, Sebastian F. Cruz‐Schiavone, Robert Skerker, Wayne J. Caputo, Nathan Krehbiel, Audrey K. Moyer‐Harris, Alyssa McAtee, Isabel Baker, Micaela D. Gray, Monique Y. Rennie

Abstract

High bacterial loads within chronic wounds increase the risk of infection and complication. Detection and localization of bacterial loads through point-of-care fluorescence (FL) imaging can objectively inform and support bacterial treatment decisions. This single time-point, retrospective analysis describes the treatment decisions made on 1000 chronic wounds (DFUs, VLUs, PIs, surgical wounds, burns, and others) at 211 wound-care facilities across 36 US states. Clinical assessment findings and treatment plans derived from them, as well as subsequent FL-imaging (MolecuLight®) findings and any associated treatment plan changes, were recorded for analysis. FL signals indicating elevated bacterial loads were observed in 701 wounds (70.8%), while only 293 (29.6%) showed signs/symptoms of infection. After FL-imaging, treatment plans changed in 528 wounds as follows: more extensive debridement (18.7%), more extensive hygiene (17.2%), FL-targeted debridement (17.2%), new topical therapies (10.1%), new systemic antibiotic prescriptions (9.0%), FL-guided sampling for microbiological analysis (6.2%), and changes in dressing selection (3.2%). These real-world findings of asymptomatic bacterial load/biofilm incidence, and of the frequent treatment plan changes post-imaging, are in accordance with clinical trial findings using this technology. These data, from a range of wound types, facilities, and clinician skill sets, suggest that point-of-care FL-imaging information improves bacterial infection management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 25%
Other 2 13%
Lecturer 2 13%
Unspecified 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 19%
Unspecified 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 556. 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 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#44,665
of 25,964,892 outputs
Outputs from International Wound Journal
#1
of 1,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,230
of 412,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Wound Journal
#1
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,964,892 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 412,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.