↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of physiologist-led stress echocardiography for the assessment of coronary artery disease

Overview of attention for article published in Echo Research & Practice, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Feasibility of physiologist-led stress echocardiography for the assessment of coronary artery disease
Published in
Echo Research & Practice, June 2017
DOI 10.1530/erp-17-0019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jamal N. Khan, Timothy Griffiths, Tamseel Fatima, Andreea Mihai, Zeeshan Mustafa, Kully Sandhu, Robert Butler, Simon Duckett, Grant Heatlie

Abstract

Physiologist-led stress echocardiography (PLSE) services provide potential for expansion of SE services and increased productivity for cardiologists. There are no published data on the feasibility of PLSE. We sought to assess the feasibility, safety and robustness of PLSE and CLSE for coronary artery disease (CAD) assessment. Retrospective analysis of 898 patients undergoing PLSE or CLSE for CAD assessment using exercise or dobutamine stress over 24 months. PLSE involved 2 cardiac physiologists (exercise) or 1 physiologist plus 1 cardiac nurse (dobutamine). A cardiology registrar was present in the echocardiography department during PLSE in case of complications. CLSE involved 1 physiologist and 1 trainee cardiologist who analysed the study and reviewed findings with an imaging cardiologist. 16-segment wall motion scoring (WMS, WMSI) analysis was performed. Feasibility (stressor, image quality, proportion of completed studies, agreement with imaging cardiologist analysis) and safety (complication rate) were compared for PLSE and CLSE. The majority of studies were CLSE (56.2%) and used dobutamine (68.7%). PLSE more commonly used exercise (69.2%). 96% of studies were successfully completed (>14 diagnostic segments in 98%, p=0.899 PLSE vs. CLSE). Commencement of PLSE was associated with an increase in annual SE's performed for CAD assessment. Complication rates were comparably very low for PLSE and CLSE (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p=0.187). There was excellent agreement between PLSE and CLSE WMS interpretation of 480 myocardial segments at rest (κ=0.87) and stress (κ=0.70) and WMSI (ICCs and Pearson's r >0.90, zero Bland-Altman mean bias). This to our knowledge is the first study of the feasibility of PLSE. PLSE performed by well-trained physiologists is feasible and safe in contemporary practice. PLSE and CLSE interpretation of stress echocardiography for CAD agree very c.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Researcher 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Unspecified 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,918,049
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Echo Research & Practice
#206
of 268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,144
of 331,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Echo Research & Practice
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 331,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.