↓ Skip to main content

Fluid Therapy LiDCO Controlled Trial—Optimization of Volume Resuscitation of Extensively Burned Patients through Noninvasive Continuous Real-Time Hemodynamic Monitoring LiDCO

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of burn care & research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Fluid Therapy LiDCO Controlled Trial—Optimization of Volume Resuscitation of Extensively Burned Patients through Noninvasive Continuous Real-Time Hemodynamic Monitoring LiDCO
Published in
Journal of burn care & research, January 2013
DOI 10.1097/bcr.0b013e318278197e
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Tokarik, Folke Sjöberg, Martin Balik, Igor Pafcuga, Ludomir Broz

Abstract

This pilot trial aims at gaining support for the optimization of acute burn resuscitation through noninvasive continuous real-time hemodynamic monitoring using arterial pulse contour analysis. A group of 21 burned patients meeting preliminary criteria (age range 18-75 years with second- third- degree burns and TBSA ≥10-75%) was randomized during 2010. A hemodynamic monitoring through lithium dilution cardiac output was used in 10 randomized patients (LiDCO group), whereas those without LiDCO monitoring were defined as the control group. The modified Brooke/Parkland formula as a starting resuscitative formula, balanced crystalloids as the initial solutions, urine output of 0.5 ml/kg/hr as a crucial value of adequate intravascular filling were used in both groups. Additionally, the volume and vasopressor/inotropic support were based on dynamic preload parameters in the LiDCO group in the case of circulatory instability and oligouria. Statistical analysis was done using t-tests. Within the first 24 hours postburn, a significantly lower consumption of crystalloids was registered in LiDCO group (P = .04). The fluid balance under LiDCO control in combination with hourly diuresis contributed to reducing the cumulative fluid balance approximately by 10% compared with fluid management based on standard monitoring parameters. The amount of applied solutions in the LiDCO group got closer to Brooke formula whereas the urine output was at the same level in both groups (0.8 ml/kg/hr). The new finding in this study is that when a fluid resuscitation is based on the arterial waveform analysis, the initial fluid volume provided was significantly lower than that delivered on the basis of physician-directed fluid resuscitation (by urine output and mean arterial pressure).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 57%
Engineering 4 6%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Neuroscience 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 22 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,783,193
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of burn care & research
#770
of 2,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,152
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of burn care & research
#24
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,101 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 288,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.