↓ Skip to main content

Nasal high flow oxygen therapy in patients with COPD reduces respiratory rate and tissue carbon dioxide while increasing tidal and end-expiratory lung volumes: a randomised crossover trial

Overview of attention for article published in Thorax, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
52 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
178 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Nasal high flow oxygen therapy in patients with COPD reduces respiratory rate and tissue carbon dioxide while increasing tidal and end-expiratory lung volumes: a randomised crossover trial
Published in
Thorax, March 2016
DOI 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207962
Pubmed ID
Authors

John F Fraser, Amy J Spooner, Kimble R Dunster, Chris M Anstey, Amanda Corley

Abstract

Patients with COPD using long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) over 15 h per day have improved outcomes. As inhalation of dry cold gas is detrimental to mucociliary clearance, humidified nasal high flow (NHF) oxygen may reduce frequency of exacerbations, while improving lung function and quality of life in this cohort. In this randomised crossover study, we assessed short-term physiological responses to NHF therapy in 30 males chronically treated with LTOT. LTOT (2-4 L/min) through nasal cannula was compared with NHF at 30 L/min from an AIRVO through an Optiflow nasal interface with entrained supplemental oxygen. Comparing NHF with LTOT: transcutaneous carbon dioxide (TcCO2) (43.3 vs 46.7 mm Hg, p<0.001), transcutaneous oxygen (TcO2) (97.1 vs 101.2 mm Hg, p=0.01), I:E ratio (0.75 vs 0.86, p=0.02) and respiratory rate (RR) (15.4 vs 19.2 bpm, p<0.001) were lower; and tidal volume (Vt) (0.50 vs 0.40, p=0.003) and end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) (174% vs 113%, p<0.001) were higher. EELV is expressed as relative change from baseline (%Δ). Subjective dyspnoea and interface comfort favoured LTOT. NHF decreased TcCO2, I:E ratio and RR, with a concurrent increase in EELV and Vt compared with LTOT. This demonstrates a potential mechanistic rationale behind the improved outcomes observed in long-term treatment with NHF in oxygen-dependent patients. ACTRN12613000028707.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 216 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 13%
Student > Master 29 13%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Other 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 18 8%
Other 52 24%
Unknown 45 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 12%
Unspecified 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 50 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 June 2022.
All research outputs
#775,808
of 23,914,787 outputs
Outputs from Thorax
#276
of 5,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,596
of 303,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Thorax
#3
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,914,787 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,471 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 303,568 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 97% of its contemporaries.