↓ Skip to main content

The clinical practice guideline for the management of ARDS in Japan

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, July 2017
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 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
The clinical practice guideline for the management of ARDS in Japan
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40560-017-0222-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Satoru Hashimoto, Masamitsu Sanui, Moritoki Egi, Shinichiro Ohshimo, Junji Shiotsuka, Ryutaro Seo, Ryoma Tanaka, Yu Tanaka, Yasuhiro Norisue, Yoshiro Hayashi, Eishu Nango, ARDS clinical practice guideline committee from the Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine and the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine

Abstract

The Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine and the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine provide here a clinical practice guideline for the management of adult patients with ARDS in the ICU. The guideline was developed applying the GRADE system for performing robust systematic reviews with plausible recommendations. The guideline consists of 13 clinical questions mainly regarding ventilator settings and drug therapies (the last question includes 11 medications that are not approved for clinical use in Japan). The recommendations for adult patients with ARDS include: we suggest against early tracheostomy (GRADE 2C), we suggest using NPPV for early respiratory management (GRADE 2C), we recommend the use of low tidal volumes at 6-8 mL/kg (GRADE 1B), we suggest setting the plateau pressure at 30cmH20 or less (GRADE2B), we suggest using PEEP within the range of plateau pressures less than or equal to 30cmH2O, without compromising hemodynamics (Grade 2B), and using higher PEEP levels in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (Grade 2B), we suggest using protocolized methods for liberation from mechanical ventilation (Grade 2D), we suggest prone positioning especially in patients with moderate to severe respiratory dysfunction (GRADE 2C), we suggest against the use of high frequency oscillation (GRADE 2C), we suggest the use of neuromuscular blocking agents in patients requiring mechanical ventilation under certain circumstances (GRADE 2B), we suggest fluid restriction in the management of ARDS (GRADE 2A), we do not suggest the use of neutrophil elastase inhibitors (GRADE 2D), we suggest the administration of steroids, equivalent to methylprednisolone 1-2mg/kg/ day (GRADE 2A), and we do not recommend other medications for the treatment of adult patients with ARDS (GRADE1B; inhaled/intravenous β2 stimulants, prostaglandin E1, activated protein C, ketoconazole, and lisofylline, GRADE 1C; inhaled nitric oxide, GRADE 1D; surfactant, GRADE 2B; granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, N-acetylcysteine, GRADE 2C; Statin.). This article was translated from the Japanese version originally published as the ARDS clinical practice guidelines 2016 by the committee of ARDS clinical practice guideline (Tokyo, 2016, 293p, available from http://www.jsicm.org/ARDSGL/ARDSGL2016.pdf). The original article, written for Japanese healthcare providers, provides points of view that are different from those in other countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 160 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 16%
Other 17 11%
Student > Master 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 14 9%
Lecturer 11 7%
Other 39 24%
Unknown 37 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Unspecified 3 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 1%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 44 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,046,633
of 25,468,708 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#96
of 580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,453
of 327,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,468,708 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 327,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.