↓ Skip to main content

Qualitative real-time analysis by nurses of sublingual microcirculation in intensive care unit: the MICRONURSE study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Qualitative real-time analysis by nurses of sublingual microcirculation in intensive care unit: the MICRONURSE study
Published in
Critical Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-1106-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sébastien Tanaka, Anatole Harrois, Camille Nicolaï, Mélanie Flores, Sophie Hamada, Eric Vicaut, Jacques Duranteau

Abstract

We aimed to determine i) the feasibility of nurses taking bedside measurements of microcirculatory parameters in real time in intensive care patients; and ii) whether such measurements would be comparable to those obtained by the classical delayed semi quantitative analysis made by a physician. This prospective observational study was conducted in a university hospital and was approved by our local Institutional Review Board (IRB 00006477). After ICU admission and study inclusion, a set of measurements of macrocirculatory and microcirculatory parameters was taken by the nurse in charge of the patient every 4 h within the first 12 h after admission and before and after every hemodynamic therapeutic intervention. Seventy-four sublingual microvascular measurements were performed with incident dark field illumination (IDF) microscopy in 20 mechanically ventilated patients hospitalized in the ICU. There were no significant differences between the microvascular flow index (MFI) taken in real time by the nurses and the delayed evaluation by the physician. In fact, the nurses' real-time measurement of MFI demonstrated good agreement with the physician's delayed measurement. The mean difference between the two MFIs was -0.15, SD = 0.28. The nurses' real-time MFI assessment showed 97 % sensitivity (95 % CI: 84-99 %) and 95 % specificity (95 % CI: 84-99 %) at detecting a MFI <2.5 obtained by a physician upon delayed semiquantitative measurement. Concerning the density, 81 % of the paramedical qualitative density measurements corresponded with the automatized total vessel density (TVD) measurements. The nurses' real-time TVD assessment showed 77 % sensitivity (95 % CI: 46-95 %) and 100 % specificity (95 % CI: 89-100 %) at detecting a TVD <8 mm/mm(2). A real-time qualitative bedside evaluation of MFI by nurses showed good agreement with the conventional delayed analysis by physicians. The bedside evaluations of MFI and TVD were highly sensitive and specific for detecting impaired microvascular flow and low capillary density. These results suggest that this real-time technique could become part of ICU nurse routine surveillance and be implemented in algorithms for hemodynamic resuscitation in future clinical trials and regular practice. These results are an essential step to demonstrate whether these real-time measurements have a clinical impact in the management of ICU patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 73 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Researcher 9 12%
Other 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Psychology 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 18 24%
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 30 September 2019.
All research outputs
#6,410,375
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,670
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,903
of 395,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#316
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 395,421 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.