↓ Skip to main content

Prehospital lung ultrasound for the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prehospital lung ultrasound for the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a pilot study
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13049-016-0288-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian B. Laursen, Anja Hänselmann, Stefan Posth, Søren Mikkelsen, Lars Videbæk, Henrik Berg

Abstract

An improved prehospital diagnostic accuracy of cardiogenic pulmonary oedema could potentially improve initial treatment, triage, and outcome. A pilot study was conducted to assess the feasibility, time-use, and diagnostic accuracy of prehospital lung ultrasound (PLUS) for the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary oedema. A prospective observational study was conducted in a prehospital setting. Patients were included if the physician based prehospital mobile emergency care unit was activated and one or more of the following two were present: respiratory rate >30/min., oxygen saturation <90 %. Exclusion criteria were: age <18 years, permanent mental disability or PLUS causing a delay in life-saving treatment or transportation. Following clinical assessment PLUS was performed and presence or absence of interstitial syndrome was registered. Audit by three physicians using predefined diagnostic criteria for cardiogenic pulmonary oedema was used as gold standard. A total of 40 patients were included in the study. Feasibility of PLUS was 100 % and median time used was 3 min. The gold standard diagnosed 18 (45.0 %) patients with cardiogenic pulmonary oedema. The diagnostic accuracy of PLUS for the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary oedema was: sensitivity 94.4 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 72.7-99.9 %), specificity 77.3 % (95 % CI 54.6-92.2 %), positive predictive value 77.3 % (95 % CI 54.6-92.2 %), negative predictive value 94.4 % (95 % CI 72.7-99.9 %). The sensitivity of PLUS is high, making it a potential tool for ruling-out cardiogenic pulmonary. The observed specificity was lower than what has been described in previous studies. Performed, as part of a physician based prehospital emergency service, PLUS seems fast and highly feasible in patients with respiratory failure. Due to its diagnostic accuracy, PLUS may have potential as a prehospital tool, especially to rule out cardiogenic pulmonary oedema.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 tweeters 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 96 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 16%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 26 27%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 61%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Unspecified 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 17 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 14 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,331,181
of 20,550,211 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#120
of 1,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,178
of 278,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,550,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
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 278,652 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them