↓ Skip to main content

Increasing evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections in a resource-limited setting: a before-and-after feasibility trial in Gitwe, Rwanda

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Increasing evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections in a resource-limited setting: a before-and-after feasibility trial in Gitwe, Rwanda
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00134-018-5266-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olivier Urayeneza, Pierre Mujyarugamba, Zacharie Rukemba, Vincent Nyiringabo, Polyphile Ntihinyurwa, John I. Baelani, Arthur Kwizera, Danstan Bagenda, Mervyn Mer, Ndidiamaka Musa, Julia T. Hoffman, Ashok Mudgapalli, Austin M. Porter, Niranjan Kissoon, Hanno Ulmer, Lori A. Harmon, Joseph C. Farmer, Martin W. Dünser, Andrew J. Patterson, for the Sepsis in Resource-Limited Nations Workgroup of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign

Abstract

To evaluate whether a focused education program and implementation of a treatment bundle increases the rate of early evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections. Single-center, prospective, before-and-after feasibility trial. Emergency department of a sub-Saharan African district hospital. Patients > 28 days of life admitted to the study hospital for an acute infection. The trial had three phases (each of 4 months). Interventions took place during the second (educational program followed by implementation of the treatment bundle) and third (provision of resources to implement treatment bundle) phases. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected at study enrollment; 24, 48, and 72 h after hospital admission; and at discharge. A total of 1594 patients were enrolled (pre-intervention, n = 661; intervention I, n = 531; intervention II, n = 402). The rate of early evidence-based interventions per patient during Intervention Phase I was greater than during the pre-intervention phase (74 ± 17 vs. 79 ± 15%, p < 0.001). No difference was detected when data were compared between Intervention Phases I and II (79 ± 15 vs. 80 ± 15%, p = 0.58). No differences in the incidence of blood transfusion (pre-intervention, 6%; intervention I, 7%; intervention II, 7%) or severe adverse events in the first 24 h (allergic reactions: pre-intervention, 0.2%; intervention I, 0%; intervention II, 0%; respiratory failure: pre-intervention, 2%; intervention I, 2%; intervention II, 2%; acute renal failure: pre-intervention, 2%; intervention I, 2%; intervention II, 1%) were observed. Our results indicate that a focused education program and implementation of an infection treatment bundle in clinical practice increased the rate of early evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections (mostly malaria) admitted to a sub-Saharan African district hospital. Provision of material resources did not further increase this rate. While no safety issues were detected, this could be related to the very low disease severity of the enrolled patient population ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02697513).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 6 6%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 34 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Engineering 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 39 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 12 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,340,077
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,781
of 5,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,941
of 343,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#60
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 343,079 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 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 54% of its contemporaries.