↓ Skip to main content

Four ways to ventilate during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a porcine model: a randomized study

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Four ways to ventilate during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a porcine model: a randomized study
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13049-016-0262-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedict Kjærgaard, Egidijus Bavarskis, Sigridur Olga Magnusdottir, Charlotte Runge, Daiva Erentaite, Jes Sefland Vogt, Mette Dahl Bendtsen

Abstract

The optimal method for out-of-hospital ventilation during cardiopulmonary rescue (CPR) is controversial. The aim of this study was to test different modes of ventilation during CPR for a prolonged period of 60 min. Pigs were randomized to four groups after the induction of ventricular fibrillation, which was followed by one hour of mechanical cardiac compressions. The study comprised five pigs treated with free airways, five pigs treated with ventilators, six pigs treated with a constant oxygen flow into the tube, and six pigs treated with apnoeic oxygenation. The free airway group was tested for 1 h, but in the first 15 min, the median PaO2 had already dropped to 5.1 kPa. The ventilator group was tested for 1 h and still had an acceptable median PaO2 of 10.3 kPa in the last 15 min. The group was slightly hyperventilated, with PaCO2 at 3.8 kPa, even though the ventilator volumes were unchanged from those before induction of cardiac arrest. In the group with constant oxygen flowing into the tube, one pig was excluded after 47 min due to blood pressure below 25 mmHg. For the remaining 5 pigs, the median PaO2 in the last 15 min was still 14.3 kPa, and the median PaCO2 was 6.2 kPa. The group with apnoeic oxygenation for 1 h had a resulting median PaO2 of 10.2 kPa and a median PaCO2 of 12.3 kPa in the last 15 min. Except for the free airway group, the other methods resulted in PaO2 above 10 kPa and PaCO2 between 3.8 and 12.3 kPa after one hour. Constant oxgen flow and apnoeic oxygenation seemed to be useable alternatives to ventilator treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unknown 7 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,261,557
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#913
of 1,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,398
of 304,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#32
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 304,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.