Cited by 46Influenza Virus Research StudiesRespiratory viral infections researchPneumonia and Respiratory Infections

Epidemiology and clinical characteristics of hospitalized patients with pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 infections: the effects of bacterial coinfection.

Open access
Dhanoa, Amreeta, Fang, Ngim C, Hassan, Sharifah S, Kaniappan, Priyatharisni, Rajasekaram, Ganeswrie·2011·Virology Journal

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Numerous reports have described the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 infected patients. However, data on the effects of bacterial coinfection on these patients are very scarce. Therefore, this study explores the impact of bacterial coinfection on the clinical and laboratory parameters amongst H1N1 hospitalized patients. FINDINGS: This retrospective study involved hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed H1N1 infections (September 2009 to May 2010). Relevant clinical data and the detection of bacterial coinfection from respiratory or sterile site samples were obtained. Multiplex PCR was used to determine the co-existence of other respiratory viruses. Comparison was made between patients with and without bacterial coinfection. The occurrence of coinfection was 34%; 14 (28%) bacterial and only 3 (6%) viral. Mycoplasma pneumoniae (n = 5) was the commonest bacteria followed by Staphylococcus aureus (n = 3). In univariate analysis, clinical factors associated with bacterial coinfection were age > 50 years (p = 0.02), presence of comorbidity (p = 0.04), liver impairment (p = 0.02), development of complications (p = 0.004) and supplemental oxygen requirement (p = 0.02). Leukocytosis (p = 0.02) and neutrophilia (p = 0.004) were higher in bacterial coinfected patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that age > 50 years and combined complications were predictive of bacterial coinfection. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial coinfection is not uncommon in H1N1 infected patients and is more frequently noted in the older aged patients and is associated with higher rates of complications. Also, as adjunct to clinical findings, clinicians need to have a higher index of suspicion if neutrophilia was identified at admission as it may denote bacterial coinfection.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1743-422x-8-501

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a retrospective study of 50 patients infected during pandemic influenza, 28% showed co/secondary bacterial infection; Mycoplasma pneumoniae was found in 10%, S. aureus in 6%, K. pneumoniae and S. pneumoniae in 4%, and M. catarrhalis, P. aeruginosa, S. pyogenes, and Streptococcus agalactiae in 2%.

    “In a retrospective study of 50 patients who were infected during pandemic influenza, 28% showed co/secondary bacterial infection (Dhanoa et al., 2011). Mycoplasma pneumoniae was found in 10%, making it the most common co/secondary infecting bacteria. This was followed by S. aureus found in 6%, K. pneumoniae and S. pneumoniae found in 4% and M. catarrhalis, P. aeruginosa, S. pyogenes, and Streptoc”

    From Secondary bacterial infections associated with influenza pandemics (2017) · cites this paper as Dhanoa et al., 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dhanoa, A., Fang, N. C., Hassan, S. S., Kaniappan, P., & Rajasekaram, G.
Affiliations
Monash University Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Dhanoa, Amreeta
Venue
Virology Journal
Published
2011-11-03
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
501-501
ISSN
1743-422X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2137015962
Cited by
45
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Virology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Monash University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Influenza Virus Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Respiratory viral infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Pneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Keywords
influenza A (H1N1) 2009, bacterial co-infection, hospitalized patients, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, medical complications, neutrophilia, leukocytosis, age as risk factor, comorbidities, liver dysfunction, supplemental oxygen
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bacteria, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Influenza, Human, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Comorbidity, Pneumonia, Bacterial, Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype, Young Adult, Pandemics, Coinfection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review