↓ Skip to main content

Heat and moisture exchanger use reduces in-hospital complications following total laryngectomy: a case–control study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Heat and moisture exchanger use reduces in-hospital complications following total laryngectomy: a case–control study
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40463-016-0154-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Foreman, R. J. De Santis, F. Sultanov, D. J. Enepekides, K. M. Higgins

Abstract

Total laryngectomy (TL) is an appropriate oncologic operation for many patients with laryngeal cancer delivering excellent oncologic outcomes, however it remains beset with significant functional consequences. Following TL, the upper and lower airways are permanently disconnected, which causes unfiltered, cold air with reduced humidity to enter the tracheobronchial tree, resulting in mucus overproduction and an increase in the viscosity of the mucus. In response to this, Heat and moisture exchangers were developed to compensate for the lost functions of the upper respiratory tract and their effect on the patients' respiratory performance in addition to their quality of life. The case records of 48 patients undergoing total laryngectomy were reviewed and data concerning demographics, surgical details, post-operative care requirements and adverse events was retrieved. Post hoc analysis of the case patients was undertaken to identify any benefit of using a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) system with particular reference to post-operative respiratory outcomes. There was no significant difference between case and control subjects based on demographics, extent of surgery or need for flap repair. 16 patients had used a HME and 32 patients had used external humidification (EH). Of those experiencing mucous plugging, only 3/24 (12.5 %) had used a HME system, in contrast to 21/24 (87.5 %) who used EH (Chi square = 9.375, p = 0.002). The odds ratio of having an adverse event if not using HME was 8.27 (CI = 1.94 - 35.71). Use of HME also significantly reduced the number of days requiring physiotherapy (1.75 days vs. 3.20 days, p = 0.034). Use of an HME system can reduce in-hospital complications, in particular episodes of mucus plugging, and post-operative care requirements. Furthermore, there is a cost benefit to using HME systems that warrants more widespread introduction of these devices in head and neck surgery centers.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 17%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Sports and Recreations 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 16 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,011,485
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#400
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,328
of 371,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 371,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 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.