↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Impact of Technical Sources of Variation on the Hand Microbiome Dynamics of Healthcare Workers

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Impact of Technical Sources of Variation on the Hand Microbiome Dynamics of Healthcare Workers
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0088999
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana Rosenthal, Allison E. Aiello, Carol Chenoweth, Deborah Goldberg, Elaine Larson, Gregory Gloor, Betsy Foxman

Abstract

We assessed the dynamics of hand microbial community structure of 34 healthcare workers from a single surgical intensive care unit over a short (3 week) time period, whilst taking into account the technical sources of variability introduced by specimen collection, DNA extraction, and sequencing. Sample collection took place at 3 different time points. Only the sampling collection method appeared to have a significant impact on the observed hand microbial community structure among the healthcare workers. Analysis of samples collected using glove-juice showed a slightly more similar microbial composition within individual hand samples over time than between the hands of different individuals over time. This was not true for samples collected using a swab, where samples from a single individual were no more similar to each other over time than those among other individuals over time, suggesting they were essentially independent. DNA extraction techniques (lysozyme only versus enzyme cocktail) and sequencing (replicate set 1 versus 2) using Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine, were not influential to the microbial community structures. Glove-juice sample collection may likely be the method of choice in hand hygiene studies in the healthcare setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 17%
Other 5 8%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 22%