↓ Skip to main content

The patient needing prolonged mechanical ventilation: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
295 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 patient needing prolonged mechanical ventilation: a narrative review
Published in
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40248-018-0118-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolino Ambrosino, Michele Vitacca

Abstract

Progress in management has improved hospital mortality of patients admitted to the intensive care units, but also the prevalence of those patients needing weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation, and of ventilator assisted individuals. The result is a number of difficult clinical and organizational problems for patients, caregivers and health services, as well as high human and financial resources consumption, despite poor long-term outcomes. An effort should be made to improve the management of these patients. This narrative review summarizes the main concepts in this field. There is great variability in terminology and definitions of prolonged mechanical ventilation.There have been several recent developments in the field of prolonged weaning: ventilatory strategies, use of protocols, early mobilisation and physiotherapy, specialised weaning units.There are few published data on discharge home rates, need of home mechanical ventilation, or long-term survival of these patients.Whether artificial nutritional support improves the outcome for these chronic critically ill patients, is unclear and controversial how these data are reported on the optimal time of initiation of parenteral vs enteral nutrition.There is no consensus on time of tracheostomy or decannulation. Despite several individualized, non-comparative and non-validated decannulation protocols exist, universally accepted protocols are lacking as well as randomised controlled trials on this critical issue. End of life decisions should result from appropriate communication among professionals, patients and surrogates and national legislations should give clear indications. Present medical training of clinicians and locations like traditional intensive care units do not appear enough to face the dramatic problems posed by these patients. The solutions cannot be reserved to professionals but must involve also families and all other stakeholders. Large multicentric, multinational studies on several aspects of management are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 295 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 295 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 15%
Student > Bachelor 34 12%
Other 23 8%
Researcher 21 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 4%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 116 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 83 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 46 16%
Unspecified 6 2%
Computer Science 4 1%
Neuroscience 4 1%
Other 23 8%
Unknown 129 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 May 2018.
All research outputs
#8,264,793
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#116
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,515
of 343,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 343,860 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.