| Title |
A 95 year-old suffering circulatory arrest after accidental hypothermia: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-017-0646-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anders Wetting Carlsen, Anders M. Winnerkvist, Guri Greiff |
| Abstract |
The elderly are vulnerable to cold and prone to accidental hypothermia, both because of environmental and endogenous factors. The incidence of severe accidental hypothermia among the elderly is poorly described, but many cases probably go unrecorded. Going through literature one finds few publications on severe hypothermia among the elderly, and, to our knowledge, nothing about extracorporeal re-warming of geriatric hypothermia victims. We present a case were a 95 year-old man with severe accidental hypothermia and circulatory arrest was brought to our hospital under on-going CPR, and was successfully resuscitated with extracorporeal circulation. He was discharged to his home without physical sequelae a few weeks later. The decision whether or not to continue resuscitation of a nonagenarian can be difficult in many respects. Knowing that resuscitation with extracorporeal circulation is resource intensive may complicate the discussion. In light of our experience with this case we discuss medical and ethical aspects of modern treatment of severe accidental hypothermia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 25% |
| Norway | 2 | 17% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 18 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,932,654
of 24,357,902 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,015
of 3,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,958
of 332,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#19
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,357,902 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,378 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 332,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.