↓ Skip to main content

Continuous positive airway pressure and noninvasive ventilation in prehospital treatment of patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review of controlled studies

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 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
Continuous positive airway pressure and noninvasive ventilation in prehospital treatment of patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review of controlled studies
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13049-014-0069-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Skule A Bakke, Morten T Botker, Ingunn S Riddervold, Hans Kirkegaard, Erika F Christensen

Abstract

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are frequently used inhospital for treating respiratory failure, especially in treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema and exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Early initiation of treatment is important for success and introduction already in the prehospital setting may be beneficial. Our goal was to assess the evidence for an effect of prehospital CPAP or NIV as a supplement to standard medical treatment alone on the following outcome measures; mortality, hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, and intubation rate. We undertook a systematic review based on a search in the three databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. We included 12 studies in our review, but only four of these were of acceptable size and quality to conclude on our endpoints of interest. All four studies examine prehospital CPAP. Of these, only one small, randomized controlled trial shows a reduced mortality rate and a reduced intubation rate with supplemental CPAP. The other three studies have neutral findings, but in two of these a trend toward lower intubation rate is found. The effect of supplemental NIV has only been evaluated in smaller studies with insufficient power to conclude on our endpoints. None of these studies have shown an effect on neither mortality nor intubation rate, but two small, randomized controlled trials show a reduction in intensive care unit length of stay and a trend toward lower intubation rate. The risk of both type two errors and publication bias is evident, and the findings are not consistent enough to make solid conclusion on supplemental prehospital NIV. Large, randomized controlled trials regarding the effect of NIV and CPAP as supplement to standard medical treatment alone, in the prehospital setting, are needed.

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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 144 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 19%
Student > Master 24 16%
Researcher 13 9%
Other 11 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 36 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 40 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2023.
All research outputs
#6,435,957
of 25,247,212 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#553
of 1,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,693
of 374,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,247,212 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 374,147 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.