| Title |
The effect of intravenous isosorbide dinitrate in acute decompensated heart failure in hospital
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-017-0459-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jérémy Chambord, David Attivi, Véronique Thuus, Claire Zeghmouli, Stéphane Gibaud |
| Abstract |
Background According to new recommendations for the management of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) in 2015, intravenous vasodilator therapy might be given as an early therapy when systolic blood pressure is normal to high (≥110 mmHg). Only 29% of patients with ADHF are treated with vasodilators without medical contraindication. Objective To evaluate the effect of the systematic use of ISDN on ADHF without contraindication especially on rehospitalization rate. Settings The 600-bed hospital (Centre Hospitalier de l'Ouest Vosgien, Neufchâteau, France). Methods This is a retrospective study with data analysed from medical records. Patients with ADHF episodes and hospitalization in the cardiology department or intensive care unit (ICU) between November 2013 and December 2015 were included resulting in 199 hospitalizations in the analysis (37 were treated by ISDN, and 162 were not). Main outcome measure Effects of ISDN on 180-day hospital readmission for ADHF or acute myocardial infarction (AMI), in-hospital mortality, length of stay, number of ICU admissions, and ICU length of stay. Results Patients who received ISDN required more ICU admissions than the other patients (54.1 vs 33.3%, p = 0.02). Nevertheless 180-day hospital readmission was lower for patients who were receiving ISDN (8.1 vs 22.8%, p = 0.04). ISDN did not influence other clinical outcomes tested. Conclusion ISDN may minimize or prevent the consequences of altered haemodynamics. Lower rehospitalization rate with ISDN was seen in this study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 30% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 25% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 15% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#16,343,802
of 24,081,774 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#885
of 1,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,231
of 312,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#19
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,081,774 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 312,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.