↓ Skip to main content

Is inhaled prophylactic heparin useful for prevention and management of pneumonia in ventilated ICU patients?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Critical Care, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Is inhaled prophylactic heparin useful for prevention and management of pneumonia in ventilated ICU patients?
Published in
Journal of Critical Care, July 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.06.022
Pubmed ID
Authors

IPHIVAP investigators of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group, Inhaled Heparin Investigators, Hiran Bandeshe, Rob Boots, Joel Dulhunty, Rachael Dunlop, Anthony Holley, Paul Jarrett, Charles D. Gomersall, Jeff Lipman, Thomas Lo, Steven O'Donoghue, Jenny Paratz, David Paterson, Jason A. Roberts, Therese Starr, Di Stephens, Janine Stuart, Jane Thomas, Andrew Udy, Hayden White

Abstract

The purpose was to determine the efficacy of prophylactic inhaled heparin for the prevention and treatment of pneumonia in patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). A phase 2, double-blind, randomized controlled trial stratified for study center and patient type (nonoperative, postoperative) was conducted in 3 university-affiliated intensive care units. Patients aged at least 18 years and requiring invasive MV for more than 48 hours were randomized to usual care, nebulization of unfractionated sodium heparin (5000 U in 2 mL), or nebulization with 0.9% sodium chloride (2 mL) 4 times daily with the main outcome measures, the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), ventilator-associated complication, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores in patients with admission pneumonia or developing VAP. ACTRN12612000038897. A total of 214 patients were enrolled (72 usual care, 71 inhaled sodium heparin, 71 inhaled sodium chloride). There were no differences between treatment groups in terms of the development of VAP using either Klompas criteria (6%-7%, P=1.00) or clinical diagnosis (24%-26%, P=.85). Low-dose nebulized heparin cannot be recommended for prophylaxis against VAP or to hasten recovery from pneumonia in patients receiving MV.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 25%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
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 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Critical Care
#1,466
of 2,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,762
of 372,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Critical Care
#35
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 372,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.