↓ Skip to main content

Transmission Dynamics of Hyper-Endemic Multi-Drug Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in a Southeast Asian Neonatal Unit: A Longitudinal Study With Whole Genome Sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, 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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Transmission Dynamics of Hyper-Endemic Multi-Drug Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in a Southeast Asian Neonatal Unit: A Longitudinal Study With Whole Genome Sequencing
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01197
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pieter W. Smit, Nicole Stoesser, Sreymom Pol, Esther van Kleef, Mathupanee Oonsivilai, Pisey Tan, Leakhena Neou, Claudia Turner, Paul Turner, Ben S. Cooper

Abstract

Background:Klebsiella pneumoniae is an important and increasing cause of life-threatening disease in hospitalized neonates. Third generation cephalosporin resistance (3GC-R) is frequently a marker of multi-drug resistance, and can complicate management of infections. 3GC-R K. pneumoniae is hyper-endemic in many developing country settings, but its epidemiology is poorly understood and prospective studies of endemic transmission are lacking. We aimed to determine the transmission dynamics of 3GC-R K. pneumoniae in a newly opened neonatal unit (NU) in Cambodia and to address the following questions: what is the diversity of 3GC-R K. pneumoniae both within- and between-host; to what extent is high carriage prevalence driven by ward-based transmission; and to what extent can environmental contamination explain patterns of patient acquisition. Methods: We performed a prospective longitudinal study between September and November 2013. Rectal swabs from consented patients were collected upon NU admission and every 3 days thereafter. Morphologically different colonies from swabs growing cefpodoxime-resistant K. pneumoniae were selected for whole-genome sequencing (WGS). Results: One hundred and fifty-eight samples from 37 patients and 7 environmental sites were collected. 32/37 (86%) patients screened positive for 3GC-R K. pneumoniae and 93 colonies from 119 swabs were successfully sequenced. Isolates were resistant to a median of six (range 3-9) antimicrobials. WGS revealed high diversity; pairwise distances between isolates from the same patient were either 0-1 SNV or >1,000 SNVs; 19/32 colonized patients harbored K. pneumoniae colonies differing by >1000 SNVs. Diverse lineages accounted for 18 probable importations to the NU and nine probable transmission clusters involving 19/37 (51%) of screened patients. Median cluster size was five patients (range 3-9). Seven out of 46 environmental swabs (15%) were positive for 3GC-R K. pneumoniae. Environmental sources were plausible sources for acquisitions in 2/9 transmission clusters, though in both cases other patients were also plausible sources. Conclusion: The epidemiology of 3GC-R K. pneumoniae was characterized by multiple introductions, high within- and between host diversity and a dense network of cross-infection, with half of screened neonates part of a transmission cluster. We found no evidence to suggest that environmental contamination was playing a dominant role in transmission.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 21%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 21 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 28 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 06 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,298,233
of 26,495,046 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,743
of 30,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,522
of 346,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#91
of 680 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,495,046 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 346,546 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 680 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.