↓ Skip to main content

Physiological predictors of survival during high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Physiological predictors of survival during high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Critical Care, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12550
Pubmed ID
Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Data that provide clinical criteria for the identification of patients likely to respond to high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) are scarce. Our aim was to describe physiological predictors of survival during HFOV in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) admitted to a respiratory failure centre in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Retrospective review of electronic records of 102 adults treated with HFOV. We used logistic regression and receiving-operator characteristics curve to test associations with oxygenation and mortality. RESULTS: Patients had severe ARDS with a mean (SD) Murray's score of 2.98 (0.7). Partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio and oxygenation index improved only in survivors. The earliest time point at which the two groups differed was at three hours after commencing HFOV. An improvement of >38 % in PaO2/FiO2 occurring at any time within the first 72 hours, was the best predictor of survival at 30-days (area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83, sensitivity 93 %, specificity 78 % and a positive likelihood ratio (LR) of 4.3). These patients also had a 3.5 fold greater reduction in partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2). Multivariate analysis showed that HFOV was more effective in younger patients, when instituted early, and in patients with milder respiratory acidosis. CONCLUSIONS: HFOV is effective in improving oxygenation in adults with ARDS, particularly when instituted early. Changes in PaO2/FiO2 during the first three hours of HFOV can identify those patients more likely to survive.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 4%
Colombia 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 46 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Postgraduate 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Professor 4 8%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 63%
Engineering 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 9 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 March 2013.
All research outputs
#3,079,395
of 4,507,144 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,074
of 2,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,011
of 89,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#129
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,144 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 89,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.