| Title |
Advanced hemodynamic monitoring in intensive care medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00063-017-0302-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
B. Saugel, P. C. Reese, J. Y. Wagner, M. Buerke, W. Huber, S. Kluge, R. Prondzinsky |
| Abstract |
Advanced hemodynamic monitoring is recommended in patients with complex circulatory shock. To evaluate the current attitudes and beliefs among German intensivists, regarding advanced hemodynamic monitoring, the actual hemodynamic management in clinical practice, and the barriers to using it. Web-based survey among members of the German Society of Medical Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine. Of 284 respondents, 249 (87%) agreed that further hemodynamic assessment is needed to determine the type of circulatory shock if no clear clinical diagnosis can be made. In all, 281 (99%) agreed that echocardiography is helpful for this purpose (transpulmonary thermodilution: 225 [79%]; pulmonary artery catheterization: 126 [45%]). More than 70% of respondents agreed that blood flow variables (cardiac output, stroke volume) should be measured in patients with hemodynamic instability. The parameters most respondents agreed should be assessed in a patient with hemodynamic instability were mean arterial pressure, cardiac output, and serum lactate. Echocardiography is available in 99% of ICUs (transpulmonary thermodilution: 91%; pulmonary artery catheter: 63%). The respondents stated that, in clinical practice, invasive arterial pressure measurements and serum lactate measurements are performed in more than 90% of patients with hemodynamic instability (cardiac output monitoring in about 50%; transpulmonary thermodilution in about 40%). The respondents did not feel strong barriers to the use of advanced hemodynamic monitoring in clinical practice. This survey study shows that German intensivists deem advanced hemodynamic assessment necessary for the differential diagnosis of circulatory shock and to guide therapy with fluids, vasopressors, and inotropes in ICU patients. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 71% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
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 14 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,497,162
of 23,061,402 outputs
Outputs from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#233
of 540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,789
of 311,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#6
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,061,402 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 540 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 311,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.