↓ Skip to main content

Tracheal Decannulation Protocol in Patients Affected by Traumatic Brain Injury

Overview of attention for article published in International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Tracheal Decannulation Protocol in Patients Affected by Traumatic Brain Injury
Published in
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, January 2014
DOI 10.1055/s-0033-1363467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabel de Lima Zanata, Rosane Sampaio Santos, Gisela Carmona Hirata

Abstract

Introduction The frequency of tracheostomy in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) contrasts with the lack of objective criteria for its management. The study arose from the need for a protocol in the decision to remove the tracheal tube. Objective To evaluate the applicability of a protocol for tracheal decannulation. Methods A prospective study with 20 patients, ranging between 21 and 85 years of age (average 33.55), 4 of whom were women (20%) and 16 were men (80%). All patients had been diagnosed by a neurologist as having TBI, and the anatomical region of the lesion was known. Patients were evaluated following criteria for tracheal decannulation through a clinical evaluation protocol developed by the authors. Results Decannulation was performed in 12 (60%) patients. Fourteen (70%) had a score greater than 8 on the Glasgow Coma Scale and only 2 (14%) of these were not able to undergo decannulation. Twelve (60%) patients maintained the breathing pattern with occlusion of the tube and were successfully decannulated. Of the 20 patients evaluated, 11 (55%) showed no signs suggestive of tracheal aspiration, and of these, 9 (82%) began training on occlusion of the cannula. The protocol was relevant to establish the beginning of the decannulation process. The clinical assessment should focus on the patient's condition to achieve early tracheal decannulation. Conclusion This study allowed, with the protocol, to establish six criteria for tracheal decannulation: level of consciousness, respiration, tracheal secretion, phonation, swallowing, and coughing.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Bachelor 14 17%
Other 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 28 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 18%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 30 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#14,807,732
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#109
of 645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,737
of 305,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#14
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 645 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 305,046 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.