↓ Skip to main content

Oximetry-supported self-management for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: mixed method feasibility pilot project

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Oximetry-supported self-management for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: mixed method feasibility pilot project
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1135-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele MacNab, Siew Hwa Lee, Lucy McCloughan, Janet Hanley, Brian McKinstry, Hilary Pinnock

Abstract

Pulse oximetry could potentially contribute to self-monitoring. NHS Lothian's 'Light Touch' service provided COPD patients with a self-management plan based on symptoms and oximetry. The service was overseen (though not actively monitored) by respiratory-trained community teams who were contactable by a telephone helpline. We aimed to assess the feasibility, perceived utility and impact of the 'Light Touch' service. A before-and-after assessment of St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and use of healthcare resources during the 6-month feasibility study compared to the previous corresponding 6-months. Paired semi-structured interviews with patients at baseline and 6-months, interviews with managers and a focus group of professionals explored perceptions of the service and self-management. Transcripts were coded, and analysed thematically. We recruited 51 participants (mean age 69.7 years (SD 8.4); 21 (46 %) male). 46 participants completed quantitative follow up (2 died, 2 were unwell, 1 refused). SGRQ: 21 (46 %) participants improved by 4 or more (the minimum important difference); 12 (26 %) deteriorated by 4 or more. HADS: more participants had normal scores for anxiety (65 %) and depression (80 %) at 6-months than at baseline (51 and 64 %). More emergency therapy was prescribed during the study period compared to the previous year. Only 18 participants (39 %) contacted the Light Touch Helpline during the 6-month study. Twenty patients provided a total of 36 interviews, 8 clinicians contributed to a focus group and 6 managers were interviewed. Patients considered that the oximetry readings heightened awareness of their condition and gave them confidence to make self-management decisions. Healthcare professionals valued oximetry as a tool for teaching people self-management skills, but were concerned that patients rarely contacted the teams for help or advice during the study. 'Light Touch' shows promise as a low-cost strategy for empowering patients' self-management skills and reducing reliance on clinical supervision.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 106 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 18%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 18%
Psychology 9 8%
Computer Science 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 28 25%

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 29 October 2015.
All research outputs
#6,539,753
of 11,426,369 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,215
of 3,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,006
of 250,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#69
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,426,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,640 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 250,935 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.