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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Interruption of enteral nutrition in the intensive care unit: a single-center survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Intensive Care, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40560-017-0245-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Midori Uozumi, Masamitsu Sanui, Tetsuya Komuro, Yusuke Iizuka, Tadashi Kamio, Hiroshi Koyama, Hideyuki Mouri, Tomoyuki Masuyama, Kazuyuki Ono, Alan Kawarai Lefor |
| Abstract |
Interruption of enteral nutrition (EN) in the intensive care unit (ICU) occurs frequently for various reasons including feeding intolerance and the conduct of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. However, few studies have investigated the details of EN interruption practices including reasons for and duration of interruptions. There is no standard protocol to minimize EN interruptions. This is a retrospective review of 100 patients in the ICU staying more than 72 h and receiving EN in a 12-bed, medical/surgical ICU in a tertiary care center in 2013. Data collected include total time designated for EN; the number of EN interruption episodes; reason for each interruption categorized as diagnostic study, therapeutic intervention, or gastrointestinal (GI) event, and their individual subcategories; duration of each interruption; and the presence of written orders for interruptions. One hundred patients staying in the ICU for at least 72 h and receiving EN were included. There were 567 episodes of EN interruption over a median ICU length of stay of 17.1 (interquartile range 8.0-22.0) days. There were a median of three EN interruption episodes per patient. EN interruption was performed for undetermined reasons (166 episodes, 29%), airway manipulation (103 episodes, 18%), GI events (78 episodes, 14%), and intermittent dialysis (71 episodes, 13%). Median duration of EN interruption in all patients was 5.5 (3.0-10.0) h. The cumulative interruption time corresponds to 19% of the total time designated for EN. Duration of EN interruption varied according to reason, including airway manipulation (9.0 [5.0-21.0] h), tracheostomy (9.5 [7.5-14.0] h), and GI events (6.5 [3.0-14.0] h). The average calorie deficits due to interruptions were 11.5% of daily target calories. Only 60 episodes (12%) had clear written orders for interruption. Based on this single-center retrospective chart review, interruption of EN in the ICU is frequent, reasons for and duration of interruption varied, and airway procedures are associated with a relatively longer duration of interruption. Documentation and orders were frequently missing. These results warrant development of a protocol for EN interruption. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 2 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 10% |
| Colombia | 1 | 10% |
| Russia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 15 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,434,858
of 24,066,486 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#263
of 544 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,233
of 320,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,066,486 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 544 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 320,612 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.