↓ Skip to main content

Effect of secondary infection on epithelialisation and total healing of cutaneous leishmaniasis lesions

Overview of attention for article published in Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, September 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
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Effect of secondary infection on epithelialisation and total healing of cutaneous leishmaniasis lesions
Published in
Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, September 2017
DOI 10.1590/0074-02760160557
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liliane de Fátima Antonio, Marcelo Rosandiski Lyra, Maurício Naoto Saheki, Armando de Oliveira Schubach, Luciana de Freitas Campos Miranda, Maria de Fátima Madeira, Maria Cristina da Silva Lourenço, Aline Fagundes, Érica Aparecida dos Santos Ribeiro, Leonardo Barreto, Maria Inês Fernandes Pimentel

Abstract

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) generally presents with a single or several localised cutaneous ulcers without involvement of mucous membranes. Ulcerated lesions are susceptible to secondary contamination that may slow the healing process. This study verified the influence of non-parasitic wound infection on wound closure (epithelialisation) and total healing. Twenty-five patients with a confirmed diagnosis of CL and ulcerated lesions underwent biopsy of ulcer borders. One direct microbial parameter (germ identification in cultures) and four indirect clinical parameters (secretion, pain, burning sensation, pruritus) were analysed. FINDINGS Biopsies of ten lesions showed secondary infection by one or two microorganisms (Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus pyogenes and Candida parapsilosis). "Secretion" and "burning sensation" influenced epithelialisation time but not total healing time. Positive detection of germs in the ulcer border and "pain" and "pruritus" revealed no influence on wound closure. Our borderline proof of clinical CL ulcer infection inhibiting CL wound healing supports the need to follow antimicrobial stewardship in CL ulcer management, which was recently proposed for all chronic wounds.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 20%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Master 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 23 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 24 37%
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 14 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#953
of 1,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,295
of 324,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#10
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,502 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 324,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.