↓ Skip to main content

Early physical rehabilitation in intensive care patients with sepsis syndromes: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
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 (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
162 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
422 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
Early physical rehabilitation in intensive care patients with sepsis syndromes: a pilot randomised controlled trial
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3763-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geetha Kayambu, Robert Boots, Jennifer Paratz

Abstract

Survivors of sepsis syndromes have poor outcomes for physical and cognitive function. No investigations of early physical rehabilitation in the intensive care unit have specifically targeted patients with sepsis syndromes. To determine whether early physical rehabilitation improves physical function and associated outcomes in patients with sepsis syndromes. Fifty critically ill adults admitted to a general intensive care unit with sepsis syndromes were recruited into a prospective double-blinded randomised controlled trial investigating early physical rehabilitation. Primary outcomes of physical function (acute care index of function) and self-reported health-related quality of life were recorded at ICU discharge and 6 months post-hospital discharge, respectively. Secondary measures included inflammatory biomarkers; Interleukin-6, Interleukin-10 and tumour necrosis factor-α, blood lactate, fat-free muscle mass, exercise capacity, muscle strength and anxiety. A significant increase in patient self-reported physical function (81.8 ± 22.2 vs. 60.0 ± 29.4), p = 0.04) and physical role (61.4 ± 43.8 vs. 17.1 ± 34.4, p = 0.005) for the SF-36 at 6 months was found in the exercise group. Physical function scores were not significantly different between groups. Muscle strength scores were (51.9 ± 10.5 vs. 47.3 ± 13.6, p = 0.24) with the standard care mean Medical Research Council Muscle Score (MRC) <48/60. The mean change of Interleukin-10 increased and was significantly higher in the exercise group (1.8 pg/ml, 180 % vs. 0.9 pg/ml, 90 %, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference between groups for lactate, Interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor-α, muscle strength, exercise capacity, fat-free mass or hospital anxiety. Implementation of early physical rehabilitation can improve self-reported physical function and induce systemic anti-inflammatory effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 422 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 420 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 15%
Student > Bachelor 50 12%
Researcher 37 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 7%
Other 77 18%
Unknown 131 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 108 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 86 20%
Sports and Recreations 17 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 2%
Engineering 9 2%
Other 42 10%
Unknown 150 36%
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 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,552,272
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#2,230
of 4,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,503
of 264,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#23
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 264,940 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.