Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32523492›Full record

ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2020

Analysis Of Blood Culture Results Of Burn Septicaemia Patients Over A Period Of Nine Years In The Baghdad Burn Medical Centre.

A K Almajidy, A K Jasim, R K Almajidy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A K AlmajidyBurn Specialty Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq.
A K JasimDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Baghdad, Iraq.
R K AlmajidyDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany.
University of Baghdad · IQ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Burn is one of the most devastating traumas that someone can encounter in their life. Burn wound sepsis is still the leading cause of death in burned patients. Appropriate knowledge of the causative pathogen in burn sepsis is important for successful patient management and for the reduction of the incidence of antibiotic resistance. A retrospective study was conducted between 2010 and 2018 at the Burn Specialty Hospital in Baghdad. A total of 320 blood culture samples were obtained from patients with sepsis or suspected of having sepsis. Patient age ranged between 9 months to 70 years old, with a mean total burn surface area of 45.26%. The most common microorganisms isolated from those patients who had sepsis or suspicion of sepsis were Klebsiella (48 cases) followed by Pseudomonas (36 cases), Staphylococcus species (26 cases), Enterococcus (8 cases), Acinetobacter (11 cases), E-Coli (11 cases), Candida (4 cases), Proteus (2 cases), and Salmonella, Streptococcus pneumonia, Monilia, and Seriata one case for each. The most commonly isolated organism was Klebsiella: it was sensitive to Imipenem followed by Amikacin, Nitrofurantoin, Piperacillin, Ciprofloxacin, Co-trimoxazole, Chloramphenicol, Tetracycline, Azithromycin and Cefotaxime. Microbiological surveillance of burn patients with sepsis or suspicion of having sepsis over a period of 9 years in our hospital has shown that the most common microorganism isolated from blood cultures was Klebsiella. Klebsiella was sensitive to Imipenem mainly according to sensitivity testing using the disk diffusion method.

Indexed as

burnImipenemKlebsiellasepsis

Identifiers

PMID32523492
PMCPMC7263722
OpenAlexW3033257784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.