↓ Skip to main content

The accuracy and timeliness of a Point Of Care lactate measurement in patients with Sepsis

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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 accuracy and timeliness of a Point Of Care lactate measurement in patients with Sepsis
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13049-015-0151-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fatene Ismail, William G. Mackay, Andrew Kerry, Harry Staines, Kevin D. Rooney

Abstract

The aims of this study were to a) compare the lactate measurement of a Point of Care (POC) handheld device to near patient blood gas analysers, and b) determine the differential reporting times between the analysers. A two-staged study; method comparison and prospective observational stages, was conducted. For the first stage, blood samples were analysed on the i-STAT handheld device and the near patient blood gas analysers (GEM 4000 and OMNI S). Results were compared using Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman tests. For the second stage, we examined the differential reporting times of the POC device compared to the near patient blood gas analysers in two Scottish hospitals. Differential reporting times were assessed using Mann-Whitney test and descriptive statistics were reported with quartiles. Highly significant Pearson correlation coefficients (0.999 and 0.993 respectively) were found between i-STAT and GEM 4000 and OMNI S. The Bland-Altman agreement method showed bias values of -0.03 and -0.24, between i-STAT and GEM 4000 and OMNI S respectively. Median time from blood draw to i-STAT lactate results was 5 min (Q1-Q3 5-7). Median time from blood draw to GEM 4000 lactate results was 10 min (Q1-Q3 7.75-13). Median time from blood draw to OMNIS lactate results was 11 min (Q1-Q3 8-22). The i-STAT was significantly quicker than both the GEM 4000 and the OMNIS (each p-value < 0.001). In addition, 18 of our study samples were sent to the central laboratory for analysis due to a defect in the lactate module of OMNI S. The median time for these samples from blood draw to availability of the central laboratory results at the clinical area was 133 min. The POC handheld device produced accurate, efficient and timely lactate measurements with the potential to influence clinical decision making sooner.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 18%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Postgraduate 9 14%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Engineering 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,832,845
of 14,513,255 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#541
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,377
of 247,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,513,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 247,239 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them