↓ Skip to main content

Long-term neuromuscular sequelae of critical illness

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 Mendeley
Title
Long-term neuromuscular sequelae of critical illness
Published in
Journal of Neurology, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00415-012-6605-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Semmler, Torsten Okulla, Markus Kaiser, Burkhardt Seifert, Michael T. Heneka

Abstract

In this observational study, we analyzed the long-term neuromuscular deficits of survivors of critical illness. Intensive care unit-acquired muscular weakness (ICU-AW) is a very common complication of critical illness. Critical illness polyneuropathy (CIP) and critical illness myopathy (CIM) are two main contributors to ICU-AW. ICU-AW is associated with an increased mortality and leads to rehabilitation problems. However, the long-term outcome of ICU-AW and factors influencing it are not well known. We analyzed the medical records of 490 survivors of critical illness, aged 18-75 years and located in the area of the study center. Intensive care unit (ICU) survivors with comorbidities that might influence neuromuscular follow-up examinations, muscle strength, or results of nerve conduction studies, such as renal or hepatic insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, or vitamin deficiency were excluded. A total of 51 patients were finally included in the study. Six to 24 months after discharge from the ICU, we measured the Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score, the Overall Disability Sum score (ODSS), and also performed nerve conduction studies and EMG. For all ICU survivors, the median MRC sum score was 60 (range 47-60) and the median ODSS score was 0 (range 0-8). CIP was diagnosed in 21 patients (41 %). No patient was diagnosed with CIM. Patients with diagnosis of CIP showed a higher median ODSS scores 1 (range 0-8) versus 0 (range 0-5); p < 0.001 and lower median MRC sum scores 56 (range 47-60) versus 60 (range 58-60); p < 0.001. The three main outcome variables MRC sum score, ODSS score and diagnosis of CIP were not related to age, gender, or diagnosis of sepsis. The MRC sum score (r = -0.33; p = 0.02) and the ODSS score (r = 0.31; p = 0.029) were correlated with the APACHE score. There was a trend for an increased APACHE score in patients with diagnosis of CIP 19 (range 6-33) versus 16.5 (range 6-28); p = 0.065. Patients with the diagnosis of CIP had more days of ICU treatment 11 days (range 2-74) versus 4 days (range 1-61); p = 0.015, and had more days of ventilator support 8 days (range 1-59) versus 2 days (range 1-46); p = 0.006. The MRC sum score and the ODSS score were correlated with the days of ICU treatment and with the days of ventilator support. The neuromuscular long-term consequences of critical illness were not severe in our study population. As patients with concomitant diseases and old patients were excluded from this study the result of an overall favorable prognosis of ICU-acquired weakness may not be true for other patient's case-mix. Risk factors for the development of long-term critical illness neuropathy are duration of ICU treatment, duration of ventilator support, and a high APACHE score, but not diagnosis of sepsis. Although ICU-AW can be serious complication of ICU treatment, this should not influence therapeutic decisions, given its favorable long-term prognosis, at least in relatively young patients with no concomitant diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Chile 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 173 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 29 16%
Researcher 25 14%
Student > Master 25 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Professor 14 8%
Other 49 27%
Unknown 23 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Sports and Recreations 4 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 34 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 July 2012.
All research outputs
#15,247,248
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#3,207
of 4,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,192
of 163,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#34
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,448 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 163,008 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.