Annals of Thoracic Medicine Official publication of the Saudi Thoracic Society, affiliated to King Saud University
 
Search Ahead of print Current Issue Archives Instructions Subscribe e-Alerts Login 
Home Email this article link Print this article Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size


 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2010  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 92-96
Acinetobacter pneumonia: Is the outcome different from the pneumonias caused by other agents


1 Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey
2 Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Bacteriology, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey
3 Department of Biostatistics, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey

Date of Submission21-Nov-2009
Date of Acceptance20-Jan-2010
Date of Web Publication13-Apr-2010

Correspondence Address:
Ebru Cakir Edis
Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Trakya University Medical Faculty, 22030 Edirne
Turkey
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/1817-1737.62472

PMID: 20582174

Rights and Permissions

   Abstract 

Background : The principal aim of the present study was to determine whether Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia differs from hospital-acquired pneumonias (HAPs) caused by other agents with respect to therapeutic success and survival rate.
METHODS : This study includes 140 adult patients diagnosed with HAPs caused by identified etiologic agents between March 2005 and February 2006. These patients were divided into two groups according to the agent responsible for their infection (Acinetobacter spp. [n = 63] or non-Acinetobacter spp. [n = 77]). The groups were compared in terms of risk factors, therapeutic success and six-week survival rates.
Results : Previous antibiotic use and the risk of aspiration were independent factors responsible for the development of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia. Hypoalbuminemia, steroid use and the use of a mechanical ventilator were determined to be mortality-associated independent risk factors for Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia. The clinical success rate at the end of therapy was 41.6% and, at the sixth week, the survival rate was 35% among patients in whom Acinetobacter spp. was the causative agent. Conversely, in the control group, these values were 43 and 32%, respectively ( P > 0.05). We found that the use of the appropriate antibiotics for the treatment of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia was an important factor in survival ( P < 0.001).
Conclusion : The outcomes of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia do not differ from HAPs associated with non-Acinetobacter spp. in terms of therapeutic success and survival rates.


Keywords: Acinetobacter spp., hospital-acquired pneumonia, risk factors, survival, therapeutic success


How to cite this article:
Edis EC, Hatipoglu ON, Tansel O, Sut N. Acinetobacter pneumonia: Is the outcome different from the pneumonias caused by other agents. Ann Thorac Med 2010;5:92-6

How to cite this URL:
Edis EC, Hatipoglu ON, Tansel O, Sut N. Acinetobacter pneumonia: Is the outcome different from the pneumonias caused by other agents. Ann Thorac Med [serial online] 2010 [cited 2020 Dec 5];5:92-6. Available from: https://www.thoracicmedicine.org/text.asp?2010/5/2/92/62472


Acinetobacter species are Gram-negative, nonfermentative, nonspore-forming, nonmotile, aerobic coccobacillary organisms. The prevalence of infections caused by Acinetobacter spp. has increased rapidly since the 1970s. [1]

Acinetobacter spp. are frequently encountered agents responsible for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), especially the late-onset, ventilator-associated pneumonias (VAPs). Acinetobacter spp. rapidly acquire antibiotic-resistance mechanisms, which may contribute to its virulance. Hospital-acquired pneumonias caused by Acinetobacter spp. lead to significant mortality and morbidity because of both their intrinsic and acquired resistance. [2] However, there have been a limited number of studies comparing Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia and non-Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia. [3],[4]

The primary aim of the present study was to determine whether Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia is different from HAPs caused by other agents in terms of therapeutic success and survival rate. The secondary aim was to assess the drug resistance characteristics of Acinetobacter spp. and the independent risk factors associated with the development and mortality of pneumonia caused by Acinetobacter spp. in our hospital.


   Methods Top


This study included 140 adult patients with HAP of known etiologic agent, admitted to the Trakya University Medical Faculty Hospital between March 2005 and February 2006. When the etiologic agent of their pneumonia could be identified, the patients were divided into two groups: those with HAP caused by an Acinetobacter spp. [n = 63] and those with HAP caused by a non-Acinetobacter spp. [n = 77; control group].

Definitions

  1. Hospital-acquired pneumonia: Hospital-acquired pneumonia was defined according to the standard definitions of the American Thoracic Society guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired pneumonia. [5]
  2. Ventilator-associated pneumonia: Pneumonia that developed 48 h after being connected to a ventilator was accepted as VAP. [5]
  3. HAP developed in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy: HAP developed in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for solid organ tumors, hematologic malignancy, or rheumatoid disease. The use of >20 mg corticosteroid for at least 3 weeks was assumed the required criteria for being considered as immunosuppressive therapy.
  4. Pneumonias that developed >4 days after hospitalization were considered late-onset pneumonias. [5]
  5. Patients were considered to have severe HAP in the presence of one of the following criteria: [6]
    • arterial oxygen pressure (PaO 2 )/fractioned oxygen percentage (FiO 2 ) < 250;
    • severe sepsis or septic shock findings; or
    • bilateral or multilobar involvement, cavitations, abscess, effusion and rapid progression.
  6. Multidrug-resistance (MDR) was defined as resistance to more than one of the following five drug classes: antipseudomonal cephalosporins, antipseudomonal carbapenems, b-lactam/b-lactamase inhibitor combinations, antipseudomonal fluoroquinolones and aminoglycosides. [7]
  7. Clinical success was marked by a decline or disappearance of symptoms (fever, cough, sputum, and dyspnea) in the patients receiving antibiotic therapy. [8]
  8. Appropriate antibiotherapy: The patients were given at least three days of antibiotics appropriate to the antibiogram of the identified etiologic agent.
Study protocol

Data obtained from the patients included in the study were collected prospectively. The approval of the local Ethical Committee was obtained during the planning phase of the study and each patient (or his/her caregivers) gave informed consent prior to participation in the study. The patients' demographic data, risk factors and the severity and the day of onset of the pneumonia were recorded. Chest X-rays, blood count, biochemical parameters, arterial blood gases and CRP were obtained from each patient prior to the initiation of therapy. Blood and sputum/tracheal aspirate cultures (if possible) were also obtained. Sputum/tracheal aspirate specimens containing >25 leukocytes per field and <10 epithelial cells per field were deemed acceptable for culture. Pleural fluid samples were obtained from patients with previously detected pleural effusions. Computed thoracic tomography was performed as required.

The decisions pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of HAP were managed multidisciplinarily by the clinician responsible for the care of the patient, the pulmonary disease specialist, and the infectious disease specialist. Clinically recovered patients were discharged after posttreatment evaluation. Discharged patients were called for follow-up at the sixth week.

Statistical methods

Descriptive statistics and frequency analyses were calculated for the different types of cases. Kaplan-Meier methods were used for the survival analysis. Univariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess factors that might independently affect mortality. After the univariate analysis, variables with P < 0.1 were analysed using a multivariate Cox regression model.

Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to examine independent risk factors on the outcome (Acinetobacter vs. non-Acinetobacter). Multivariate logistic regression analysis with a backward stepwise method was used to examine significant factors ( P < 0.10) obtained from a univariate model.

A P value of <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 9.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) statistical software.


   Results Top


Of the 63 patients in whom Acinetobacter spp. were isolated, 38 (60%) were male and 25 (40%) were female. The mean age was 64.43 ± 13.89 years, with a range of 35 to 95 years. Thirty-eight of these patients were hospitalized in the internal medicine service, whereas 25 patients were hospitalized in the surgery service. The clinical services from which Acinetobacter spp. were most frequently grown were neurology (n = 29, 46%) and brain surgery (n = 7, 11.1%). In patients in whom Acinetobacter spp. were isolated, 43 had HAP, 17 had VAP and 3 had pneumonia that developed during immunosuppressive therapy. In the group in which etiologic agents other than Acinetobacter spp. were isolated, 45 had HAP, 17 had VAP and 15 had pneumonia that developed during immunosuppressive therapy ( p0 = 0.027).

Seventy Acinetobacter spp. infections were isolated from the 63 patients followed during the course of the study. Of these, 49 were isolated from tracheal aspirates, 5 from blood and tracheal aspirates, 1 from pleural fluid and 15 from blood cultures (in which other possible infection sources, such as central venous catheter, etc. had been excluded). Three different Acinetobacter spp. strains were isolated from 2 patients, whereas 2 different Acinetobacter spp. strains were isolated from 3 patients. When the demographic characteristics and risk factors of the patients were compared between the groups from which Acinetobacter spp. and other causative agents were isolated, the risk factors with a P - value of <0.1 according to univariate analysis were examined by multivariate analysis [Table 1]. Previous antibiotic use ( P = 0.02) and the risk for aspiration ( P = 0.02) were determined to be significant risk factors in the group from which Acinetobacter spp. were isolated. Previous antibiotic use and aspiration risk increased the risk for Acinetobacter spp. infection nearly three-fold (95% CI, 1.15-7.32) and nearly 2.5-fold (95% CI, 1.10-5.51), respectively [Table 2]. (Aspiration risk: Patients with confusion due to any cause, especially neurological diseases and patients lying supinely.)

Determination of Acinetobacter strains is based on drug susceptibility patterns. When antibiotic susceptibility was examined, the highest susceptibility was to netilmicin [Table 3]. Sixty-four of the 70 isolated Acinetobacter spp. strains were multidrug resistant. Since tigecycline and colistin were not available in our country during this study, sensitivity for these two drugs was not investigated.

Clinical success after treatment was achieved in 26 patients (41.3%) from whom Acinetobacter spp. were isolated, but this rate was reduced to 22 patients (34.9%) after the follow-up (sixth week). In the group from which an agent other than Acinetobacter spp. was isolated, clinical success rates were 43 and 32%, respectively, and no significant difference was determined between these rates ( P = 0.8).

Forty-one of 63 patients (65%) died during the six-week period. According to the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the survival rates at the 3 rd , 7 th , 14 th and 42 nd days were 87, 76, 65 and 35%, respectively. No significant difference was determined in terms of survival rates between the group in which Acinetobacter spp. were isolated and the groups in which agents other than Acinetobacter spp. were isolated [Figure 1]. When Acinetobacter spp. strains were evaluated for sensitivity and resistance to imipenem, no difference was demonstrated in terms of survival in patients with pneumonia in whom non-Acinetobacter spp. were grown ( P = 0.77).

In the Acinetobacter spp. group, only Acinetobacter spp. were isolated from 34 patients, and in 29 patients, the isolated agents were polymicrobial. In the control group, a single agent was isolated in 62 patients, while polymicrobial agents were isolated from 15 patients. In neither group were the effects on mortality dependent upon the causative agent(s) being single or polymicrobial.

In both the Acinetobacter and non-Acinetobacter spp. groups, there were no significant differences among the patients who were exitus before receiving the appropriate antibiotics ( P = 0.57). It was found that the appropriate antibiotic treatment for Acinetobacter spp. was significant in the survival rate in the Acinetobacter spp. group ( P < 0.001), while it was nearly significant in the non-Acinetobacter spp. group ( P = 0.054). However, among the patients who were appropriately treated with antibiotics in both groups, no significant differences in terms of survival were found ( P = 0.20). For the Acinetobacter spp. group, mortality increased 5.01 (95% CI, 2.47-10.18) times when the patient did not receive the appropriate antibiotics [Figure 2].

The impact of the variables on the six-week survival in patients with Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia was analysed by univariate Cox regression analysis [Table 1]. Variables with a P -value of <0.1, according to the univariate analysis, were evaluated with multivariate analysis. Hypoalbuminemia (P = 0.04), steroid use ( P = 0.002), and the use of a mechanical ventilator ( P = 0.036) were determined as factors that independently affected survival. The risk of mortality was increased 3.24-fold by hypoalbuminemia (95% CI, 1.05-9.96), 3.07-fold by steroid use (95% CI, 1.49-6.34) and 2.19-fold by the use of a mechanical ventilator (95% CI, 1.05-4.58; [Table 4]). The effect of Acinetobacter spp. bacteriemia on mortality was not found.


   Discussion Top


This prospective observational study investigated 140 patients with a diagnosis of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). We intended to determine whether Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia is different from HAP caused by other agents with regard to therapeutic success and survival rate. We found that previous antibiotic use and the risk of aspiration were independent predictors of the development of Acinetobacter pneumonia, but we did not find differences in the clinical success or in the six-week survival rates.

We found only two studies comparing Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia and non-Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia in English literature. [3],[4] However, all studies were performed in intensive care units (ICUs) on intubated patients. The difference between the present study and the other studies is that the present study not only included all HAPs developed within the entire hospital, but also investigated the patients with HAP, VAP and pneumonia occurring during immunosuppressive treatment.

Risk factors for Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia were defined as neurologic problems and aspiration, previous antibiotic use and being connected to a ventilator. [2],[9],[10],[11],[12] In the present study, aspiration increased the risk for Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia nearly 3-fold, and previous antibiotic use increased the risk for Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia nearly 2.5-fold. Similar to our study, another study which evaluated VAPs that grew Acinetobacter spp. (n = 41) versus non-Acinetobacter spp. (n = 40) found that previous antibiotic use was determined to be a risk factor for ventilator-associated Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia, according to multivariate analysis. [3] In another study, which analysed 46 VAPs associated with Acinetobacter spp. and 79 VAPs associated with other pathogens, previous ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin use were determined to be significant risk factors. [4]

Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia was recently identified as an important cause of mortality, particularly among patients who acquire pneumonia in ICUs. We found the high proportion of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia among HAP in our institution to be very significant. In 63 of the 140 patients with HAP included in the study, Acinetobacter spp. were the responsible agents. This situation shows that, in our hospital, there are problems with regard to infection control measures and antibiotic use.

Infections caused by MDR Acinetobacter spp. are difficult to treat and are associated with high mortality. Carbapenems are frequently used in such patients; however, resistance develops rapidly. [13] The Acinetobacter spp. strains grown in the present study were susceptible to netilmicin (93%) and cefepime (69%). The susceptibility rate to imipenem was 39%. MDR Acinetobacter spp. strains were grown in 64 (91%) patients. In a study previously performed in our hospital, the susceptibility of imipenem in Acinetobacter spp. strains between 1994 and 1995 was 100%, which was then reduced to 35% between 2003 and 2004. [14] In Turkey, in a study performed on VAPs caused by Acinetobacter spp. strains, resistance to ceftazidime, imipenem and ciprofloxacin was determined to be 60, 64 and 80%, respectively, and the most susceptible antibiotic was cefoperazone-sulbactam. [15] Since tigecycline and colistin were not available in our country at the time of this study, sensitivities for these two drugs were not investigated. When it is considered that most Acinetobacter spp. cases are resistant to most drugs, the use of these antibiotics could affect the results of Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia treatment.

In patients in whom Acinetobacter spp. was isolated, the clinical success rate after treatment was 41%, which was reduced to 35% after follow-up. No significant difference was shown between the groups in which Acinetobacter spp. and non-Acinetobacter spp. were isolated in terms of clinical success, after both treatment and follow-up. Although the number of patients in whom pneumonia developed while under immunosuppressive therapy was significantly higher in the non-Acinetobacter spp. agent group, no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of survival rates. There was also no significant difference in terms of survival rates between the patients with pneumonia caused by imipenem-susceptible or -resistant Acinetobacter spp. strains and the patients with non-Acinetobacter spp. In a study performed in patients with VAP, survival was evaluated between groups in which Acinetobacter spp. (imipenem-susceptible - imipenem-resistant) and non-Acinetobacter spp. were isolated. Similar to the present study, no difference was found between the two groups in terms of survival. [3],[16],[17] In the present study, we also found that receiving the appropriate antibiotics is a factor affecting survival in the Acinetobacter spp. group.

When the mortality-associated risk factors were evaluated, it was shown that hypoalbuminemia, steroid use and the use of a mechanical ventilator increased mortality. Although there are studies investigating the risk factors affecting in-hospital mortality in ventilator-associated pneumonias caused by Acinetobacter spp., no study evaluating mortality-associated risk factors in patients with only HAP and with Acinetobacter spp. growth exists in the literature. [3],[18]

In conclusion, Acinetobacter spp. pneumonia does not differ from HAPs caused by non-Acinetobacter spp. agents in terms of therapeutic success and survival rate. Patients with HAPs caused by Acinetobacter spp. have a high risk of aspiration, the incidence of which is gradually increasing in patients who have previously received antibiotic therapy.

 
   References Top

1.Hartzell JD, Kim AS, Kortepeter MG, Moran KA. Acinetobacter pneumonia: A review. Med Gen Med 2007;9:4.  Back to cited text no. 1      
2.Luna CM, Aruj PK. Nosocomial Acinetobacter pneumonia. Respirology 2007;12:787- 91.  Back to cited text no. 2      
3.Garnacho-Montero J, Ortiz- Leyba C, Fernandez-Hinojosa E, Aldabo-Pallas T, Cayuela A, et al. Acinetobacter baumanni ventilator- associated pneumonia: Epidemiological and clinical findings. Intensive Care Med 2005;31:649-55.  Back to cited text no. 3      
4.Medina J, Formento C, Pontet J, Curbelo A, Bazet C, Gerez J, et al. Prospective study of risk factors for ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by Acinetobacter species. J Crit Care 2007;22:18-26.  Back to cited text no. 4      
5.American Thoracic Society Documents. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;171:388-416.  Back to cited text no. 5      
6.Turkish Thoracic Society Documents. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired pneumonia 2002. Turk Thorac J 2002;3:1-13.  Back to cited text no. 6      
7.Paterson DL. The epidemiologic profile of infections with multidrug-resistant Pseudonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter species. Clin Infect Dis 2006;43:43-8.  Back to cited text no. 7      
8.Cakir Edis E, Hatipoglu ON, Yilmam I, Eker A, Tansel O, et al. Hospital-acquired pneumonia developed in non- ýntensive care units. Respiration 2009;78:416-22.  Back to cited text no. 8      
9.Cisneros-Herreros JM, Garnacho-Montero J, Pachon-Ibanez ME. Nosocomial pneumonia due to Acinetobacter baumannii. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 2005;23:46-51.  Back to cited text no. 9      
10.Baraibar J, Correa H, Mariscal D, Gallego M, Vallés J, Rello J. Risk factors for infection by Acinetobacter baumannii in intubated patients with nosocomial pneumonia. Chest 1997;112:1050-4.  Back to cited text no. 10      
11.Husni RN, Goldstein LS, Arroliga AC, Hall GS, Fatica C, et al. Risk factors for an outbreak of multi-drug-resistant Acinetobacter nosocomial pneumonia among intubated patients. Chest 1999;115:1378- 82.  Back to cited text no. 11      
12.Robenshtok E, Paul M, Leibovici L, Fraser A, Pitlik S, Ostfeld I, et al. The significance of Acinetobacter baumannii bacteraemia compared with Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteraemia: Risk factors and outcomes. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:282-7.  Back to cited text no. 12      
13.Gilad J, Carmeli Y. Treatment options for multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter species. Drugs 2008;68:165-89.  Back to cited text no. 13      
14.Cakir Edis E, Caglar T, Otkun M, Gurcan M, Hatipoglu ON, et al. Causative agents of hospital-acquired pneumonia and their antimicrobial resistance. Turk J Infect 2006;20:107-10.  Back to cited text no. 14      
15.Erdem I, Ozgultekin A, Sengoz Inan A, Dincer E, Turan G, Ceran N, et al. Incidence, etiology and antibotic resistance patterns of gram-negative microorganisms isolated from patients with ventilator- associated pneumonia in a medical-surgical intensive care unit of a teaching hospital in Istanbul, Turkey (2004- 2006). Jpn J Infect Dis 2008;61:339-42.  Back to cited text no. 15      
16.Albrecht MC, Griffith ME, Murray CK, Chung KK, Horvath EE, Ward JA, et al. Impact of Acinetobacter infection on the mortality of burn patients. J Am Coll Surg 2006;203:546-50.  Back to cited text no. 16      
17.Falagas ME, Kopterides P, Siempos II. Attributable mortality of Acinetobacter baumannii infection among critically ill patients. Clin Infect Dis 2006;43:389.  Back to cited text no. 17      
18.Meric M, Willke A, Caglayan C, Toker K. Intensive care unit-acquired infections: Incidence, risk factors and associated mortality in a Turkish university hospital. Jpn J Infect Dis 2005;58:297-302.  Back to cited text no. 18      


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]

This article has been cited by
1 Appropriate initial antibiotic therapy in hospitalized patients with gram-negative infections: systematic review and meta-analysis
Gowri Raman,Esther Avendano,Samantha Berger,Vandana Menon
BMC Infectious Diseases. 2015; 15(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Corticosteroids in the Critically Ill Patient
Otavio T. Ranzani,Fernando G. Zampieri,Pedro Caruso,Antoni Torres
Clinical Pulmonary Medicine. 2015; 22(5): 215
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Risk factors and outcomes in patients with carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter infection
Astra Vitkauskiene,Asta Dambrauskiene,Kristina Cerniauskiene,Rytis Rimdeika,Raimundas Sakalauskas
Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2013; 45(3): 213
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Severe respiratory tract infections and rational antibiotic therapy [Ciȩ̇zkie zakażenia układu oddechowego a racjonalna antybiotykoterapia]
Płusa, T.
International Review of Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 2013; 19(1): 7-11
[Pubmed]
5 Risk factors and outcomes in patients with carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter infection
Vitkauskiene, A. and Dambrauskiene, A. and Cerniauskiene, K. and Rimdeika, R. and Sakalauskas, R.
Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2013; 45(3): 213-218
[Pubmed]
6 Association between systemic corticosteroids and outcomes of intensive care unit-acquired pneumonia
Ranzani, O.T. and Ferrer, M. and Esperatti, M. and Giunta, V. and Bassi, G.L. and Carvalho, C.R.R. and Torres, A.
Critical Care Medicine. 2012; 40(9): 2552-2561
[Pubmed]
7 Association between systemic corticosteroids and outcomes of intensive care unitacquired pneumonia*
Otavio Tavares Ranzani,Miquel Ferrer,Mariano Esperatti,Valeria Giunta,Gianluigi Li Bassi,Carlos Roberto Ribeiro Carvalho,Antoni Torres
Critical Care Medicine. 2012; 40(9): 2552
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 
  Search
 
   Next article
   Previous article 
   Table of Contents
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Article in PDF (503 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
    Methods
    Results
    Discussion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed4961    
    Printed177    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded852    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 7    

Recommend this journal