↓ Skip to main content

High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation Use and Severe Pediatric ARDS in the Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipient

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Care, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation Use and Severe Pediatric ARDS in the Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipient
Published in
Respiratory Care, December 2017
DOI 10.4187/respcare.05765
Pubmed ID
Authors

Courtney M Rowan, Ashley Loomis, Jennifer McArthur, Lincoln S Smith, Shira J Gertz, Julie C Fitzgerald, Mara E Nitu, Elizabeth AS Moser, Deyin D Hsing, Christine N Duncan, Kris M Mahadeo, Jerelyn Moffet, Mark W Hall, Emily L Pinos, Robert F Tamburro, Ira M Cheifetz, the Investigators of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Network

Abstract

The effectiveness of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) in the pediatric hematopoietic cell transplant patient has not been established. We sought to identify current practice patterns of HFOV, investigate parameters during HFOV and their association with mortality, and compare the use of HFOV to conventional mechanical ventilation in severe pediatric ARDS. This is a retrospective analysis of a multi-center database of pediatric and young adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for critical illness from 2009 through 2014. Twelve United States pediatric centers contributed data. Continuous variables were compared using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test or a Kruskal-Wallis analysis. For categorical variables, univariate analysis with logistic regression was performed. The database contains 222 subjects, of which 85 patients were managed with HFOV. Of this HFOV cohort, the overall pediatric ICU survival was 23.5% (n = 20). HFOV survivors were transitioned to HFOV at a lower oxygenation index than nonsurvivors (25.6, interquartile range 21.1-36.8, vs 37.2, interquartile range 26.5-52.2, P = .046). Survivors were transitioned to HFOV earlier in the course of mechanical ventilation, (day 0 vs day 2, P = .002). No patient survived who was transitioned to HFOV after 1 week of invasive mechanical ventilation. We compared patients with severe pediatric ARDS treated only with conventional mechanical ventilation versus early HFOV (within 2 d of invasive mechanical ventilation) versus late HFOV. There was a trend toward difference in survival (conventional mechanical ventilation 24%, early HFOV 30%, and late HFOV 9%, P = .08). In this large database of pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant patients who had acute respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for critical illness with severe pediatric ARDS, early use of HFOV was associated with improved survival compared to late implementation of HFOV, and the patients had outcomes similar to those treated only with conventional mechanical ventilation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 April 2023.
All research outputs
#5,361,821
of 25,287,709 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Care
#747
of 2,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,503
of 455,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Care
#14
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,287,709 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 455,411 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 61% of its contemporaries.