↓ Skip to main content

Direct extubation onto high-flow nasal cannulae post-cardiac surgery versus standard treatment in patients with a BMI ≥30: a 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
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
146 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
Title
Direct extubation onto high-flow nasal cannulae post-cardiac surgery versus standard treatment in patients with a BMI ≥30: a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3765-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda Corley, Taressa Bull, Amy J. Spooner, Adrian G. Barnett, John F. Fraser

Abstract

Patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m(2) experience more severe atelectasis following cardiac surgery than those with normal BMI and its resolution is slower. This study aimed to compare extubation of patients post-cardiac surgery with a BMI ≥30 kg/m(2) onto high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) with standard care to determine whether HFNC could assist in minimising post-operative atelectasis and improve respiratory function. In this randomised controlled trial, patients received HFNC or standard oxygen therapy post-extubation. The primary outcome was atelectasis on chest X-ray. Secondary outcomes included oxygenation, respiratory rate (RR), subjective dyspnoea, and failure of allocated treatment. One hundred and fifty-five patients were randomised, 74 to control, 81 to HFNC. No difference was seen between groups in atelectasis scores on Days 1 or 5 (median scores = 2, p = 0.70 and p = 0.15, respectively). In the 24-h post-extubation, there was no difference in mean PaO2/FiO2 ratio (HFNC 227.9, control 253.3, p = 0.08), or RR (HFNC 17.2, control 16.7, p = 0.17). However, low dyspnoea levels were observed in each group at 8 h post-extubation, median (IQR) scores were 0 (0-1) for control and 1 (0-3) for HFNC (p = 0.008). Five patients failed allocated treatment in the control group compared with three in the treatment group [Odds ratio 0.53, (95 % CI 0.11, 2.24), p = 0.40]. In this study, prophylactic extubation onto HFNC post-cardiac surgery in patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m(2) did not lead to improvements in respiratory function. Larger studies assessing the role of HFNC in preventing worsening of respiratory function and intubation are required.

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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 146 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 15%
Other 20 14%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 32 22%
Unknown 28 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 98 66%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 <1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 <1%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 35 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 13 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,727,986
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,384
of 5,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,396
of 266,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#6
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 266,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.