↓ Skip to main content

Alpha-2 agonists for sedation in mechanically ventilated neurocritical care patients: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Alpha-2 agonists for sedation in mechanically ventilated neurocritical care patients: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0331-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandre Tran, Henrietta Blinder, Brian Hutton, Shane English

Abstract

Sedation is an important consideration in the care of the neurocritically ill patient. It provides anxiety and relief, facilitates procedures and nursing tasks, and minimizes intolerance of mechanical ventilation. Alpha-2 agonists such as dexmedetomidine and clonidine have been shown to be an effective alternative in the general critical care population by reducing duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), as compared to traditional sedative agents such as propofol or benzodiazepines. However, there is a paucity of literature detailing their utility and safety in neurocritical care, a population that presents unique considerations for management of global and cerebral hemodynamics, agitation, and facilitation of neurological assessments. The objective of this review is to assess the efficacy and safety of alpha-2 agonists for non-procedural sedation in mechanically ventilated brain-injured patients. We will search the Embase and MEDLINE databases for all randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies examining neurocritically ill adult patients aged 18 years and older who are on mechanical ventilation and receiving alpha-2 agonists for non-procedural sedation. Primary outcomes of interest include effect on mean arterial pressure (MAP), intracranial pressure (ICP), and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). Secondary outcomes include adverse events, duration of mechanical ventilation, 30-day mortality, ICU length of stay, incidence of delirium, and quality of sedation. Continuous outcomes will be presented as means and mean differences and discrete counting events will be presented as event rates. Pre-defined criteria for heterogeneity are provided for determination of pooling eligibility. Where appropriate, we will pool estimates for individual outcomes. Planned subgroup analyses include specific alpha-2 agonist agent, study design, clinical diagnosis, dosing regimen, and use of adjunctive agents. Quality of evidence for the recommendation will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach where appropriate. This systematic review will summarize the evidence on the efficacy and safety for the use of alpha-2 agonists as sedative agents in the neurocritical care population. PROSPERO CRD42016037045.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 18%
Student > Master 11 14%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 17 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,480,433
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,784
of 2,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,926
of 332,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#33
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 332,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.