↓ Skip to main content

Bloodstream Infection Incidence of Different Central Venous Catheters in Neonates: A Descriptive Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, 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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Bloodstream Infection Incidence of Different Central Venous Catheters in Neonates: A Descriptive Cohort Study
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fped.2017.00142
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerdina H. Dubbink-Verheij, Vincent Bekker, Iris C. M. Pelsma, Erik W. van Zwet, Vivianne E. H. J. Smits-Wintjens, Sylke J. Steggerda, Arjan B. te Pas, Enrico Lopriore

Abstract

Central venous catheters (CVCs) in neonates are associated with a risk of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI). Most reports on the incidence of CLABSI in neonates focus on umbilical venous catheters (UVCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We evaluated the incidence and risk factors for CLABSI in a cohort of neonates with femoral venous catheters (FVCs), UVCs, and PICCs, with a gestational age ≥34 weeks born between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2013. We included 2,986 neonates with a total of 656 catheters. The CLABSI incidence rate varied from 12.3 per 1,000 catheter-days in FVCs to 10.6 per 1,000 catheter-days in UVCs and 5.3 per 1,000 catheter-days in PICCs. In a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, we did not find a difference in CLABSI risk between the catheter types (p = 0.29). The following factors were independently associated with an increased risk of CLABSI: parenteral nutrition [hazard ratio (HR) 2.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-5.41], male gender (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.17-5.90), and higher birth weight (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.002-1.09), whereas antibiotic treatment at birth (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.52) was associated with a decreased risk. In our cohort, we did not find a difference between the CLABSI incidence in FVCs, PICCs, and UVCs. Occurrence of CLABSI is associated with parenteral nutrition, male gender, and higher birth weight. Antibiotic treatment at birth was associated with a decreased risk of CLABSI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 14%
Other 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 17 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 19 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,068,665
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,919
of 6,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,224
of 316,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#36
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 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 6,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 316,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.