↓ Skip to main content

Environmental contamination by bacteria in hospital washrooms according to hand-drying method: a multi-centre study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hospital Infection, December 2018
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 (#4 of 3,231)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
101 news outlets
blogs
7 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
169 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Environmental contamination by bacteria in hospital washrooms according to hand-drying method: a multi-centre study
Published in
Journal of Hospital Infection, December 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jhin.2018.07.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Best, P. Parnell, J. Couturier, F. Barbut, A. Le Bozec, L. Arnoldo, A. Madia, S. Brusaferro, M.H. Wilcox

Abstract

Hand hygiene is a fundamental component of infection prevention, but few studies have examined whether hand-drying method affects the risk of dissemination of potential pathogens. We performed a multicentre, internal-crossover study comparing bacterial contamination levels in washrooms with hand-drying by either paper towels (PT) or jet air dryer (JAD, Dyson). 120 sampling sessions occurred over 12 weeks in each of 3 hospitals (UK/France/Italy). Bacteria were cultured from air, multiple surfaces and dust. Washroom footfall (patients/visitors/staff) was monitored externally. Footfall was nine times higher in UK washrooms. Bacterial contamination was lower in PT vs JAD washrooms; contamination was similar in France/UK, but markedly lower in Italy washrooms. Total bacterial recovery was significantly greater from JAD versus PT dispenser surfaces at all sites (median 100-300vs0-10 CFU; all p<0.0001). In UK/France, significantly more bacteria were recovered from JAD washroom floors (median 24vs191 CFU, p<0.00001). UK MSSA recovery was 3x more frequent and 6-fold higher for JADs vs PTs surfaces (both p<0.0001). UK MRSA recovery was 3x more frequent (21vs7 CFU) from JAD versus PT surfaces or floors. Significantly more enterococci and ESBL-producing bacteria were recovered from UK JAD versus PT washroom floors (p<0.0001). In France, ESBL-producing bacteria were recovered from dust twice as often during JAD versus PT use. Multiple examples of significant differences in surface bacterial contamination, including by faecal and antibiotic resistant bacteria, were observed, with higher levels in JAD versus PT washrooms. Hand-drying method affects the risk of (airborne) dissemination of bacteria in real world settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 169 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 9 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Engineering 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 26 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 959. 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 April 2021.
All research outputs
#9,923
of 18,846,954 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hospital Infection
#4
of 3,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249
of 287,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hospital Infection
#1
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,846,954 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 3,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. 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 287,247 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 55 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 99% of its contemporaries.