↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Decreased Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation on nanomodified endotracheal tubes: a dynamic airway model

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Decreased Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation on nanomodified endotracheal tubes: a dynamic airway model
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2012
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s28191
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas J Webster

Abstract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a serious and costly clinical problem. Specifically, receiving mechanical ventilation for over 24 hours increases the risk of VAP and is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and medical costs. Cost-effective endotracheal tubes (ETTs) that are resistant to bacterial infections could help prevent this problem. The objective of this study was to determine differences in the growth of Staphylococcus aureus on nanomodified and unmodified polyvinyl chloride (PVC) ETTs under dynamic airway conditions simulating a ventilated patient. PVC ETTs were modified to have nanometer surface features by soaking them in Rhizopus arrhisus, a fungal lipase. Twenty-four-hour experiments (supported by computational models) showed that airflow conditions within the ETT influenced both the location and the concentration of bacterial growth on the ETTs, especially within areas of tube curvature. More importantly, experiments revealed a 1.5 log reduction in the total number of S. aureus on the novel nanomodified ETTs compared with the conventional ETTs after 24 hours of airflow. This dynamic study showed that lipase etching can create nanorough surface features on PVC ETTs that suppress S. aureus growth, and thus may provide clinicians with an effective and inexpensive tool to combat VAP.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Master 7 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 33%
Engineering 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 4 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 July 2012.
All research outputs
#3,518,698
of 4,506,407 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#952
of 1,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,644
of 75,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#51
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,506,407 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,146 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 75,174 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.