↓ Skip to main content

Bacterial contamination in physical therapy departments in the State of Kuwait

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Physical Therapy Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Bacterial contamination in physical therapy departments in the State of Kuwait
Published in
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, June 2017
DOI 10.1589/jpts.29.1014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sameera H. Aljadi, Mashael Al-Shemmari, Jumana Al-Ramzi, Shoug Al-Abdullatif, Zahraa Hajeyah, Laila Jamal, Sara Al-Bahar

Abstract

[Purpose] Interferential therapy and electrical stimulation are electrophysical modalities commonly used in physical therapy departments to treat patients with musculoskeletal problems. These machines are applied directly to the patient's skin via a medium or electrodes, which can facilitate the transmission of microorganisms from one patient to another. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent of microorganism contamination in the machines sponges at physical therapy departments in Kuwait hospitals. [Subjects and Methods] Sixty samples comprising sponges from interferential therapy and electrical stimulation machines, and water from hot pack units were collected from 5 physical therapy departments in 5 different hospitals. The samples were analyzed at a Medical Laboratory to explore the extent and type of microorganisms present. [Results] Forty-one of the 60 samples (68.3%) were positive for microorganism contamination. Of the 41 contaminated samples, 28 (68.3%) were sponges and 13 (31.7%) were water samples. The major microorganisms found were Acinetobacter baumannii (21.9%), Serratia marcescens (12.2%), and Staphylococcus lentus (7.3%). [Conclusion] Interferential therapy and electrical stimulation in physical therapy departments have a high probability of causing cross contamination between patients. Physical therapists are encouraged to adhere to safety guidelines, such as disinfection management, disposal of used sponges, and regular sponge replacement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 4 20%
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Materials Science 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,742,933
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#832
of 1,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,388
of 331,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#23
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 1,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 331,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 50% of its contemporaries.