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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Uso y titulación de presión soporte en Argentina: estudio transversal de tipo encuesta online
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.5935/0103-507x.20200013 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joaquin Pérez, Javier Hernán Dorado, Ana Carolina Papazian, Maricel Berastegui, Daniela Inés Gilgado, Gimena Paola Cardoso, Cristian Cesio, Matías Accoce |
| Abstract |
To identify common practices related to the use and titration of pressure-support ventilation (PC-CSV - pressure control-continuous spontaneous ventilation) in patients under mechanical ventilation and to analyze diagnostic criteria for over-assistance and under-assistance. The secondary objective was to compare the responses provided by physician, physiotherapists and nurses related to diagnostic criteria for over-assistance and under-assistance. An online survey was conducted using the Survey Monkey tool. Physicians, nurses and physiotherapists from Argentina with access to PC-CSV in their usual clinical practice were included. A total of 509 surveys were collected from October to December 2018. Of these, 74.1% were completed by physiotherapists. A total of 77.6% reported using PC-CSV to initiate the partial ventilatory support phase, and 43.8% of respondents select inspiratory pressure support level based on tidal volume. The main objective for selecting positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level was to decrease the work of breathing. High tidal volume was the primary variable for detecting over-assistance, while the use of accessory respiratory muscles was the most commonly chosen for under-assistance. Discrepancies were observed between physicians and physiotherapists in relation to the diagnostic criteria for over-assistance. The most commonly used mode to initiate the partial ventilatory support phase was PC-CSV. The most frequently selected variable to guide the titration of inspiratory pressure support level was tidal volume, and the main objective of PEEP was to decrease the work of breathing. Over-assistance was detected primarily by high tidal volume, while under-assistance by accessory respiratory muscles activation. Discrepancies were observed among professions in relation to the diagnostic criteria for over-assistance, but not for under-assistance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Cuba | 1 | 25% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 25% |
| Argentina | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 58% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 11% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 63% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 May 2020.
All research outputs
#7,854,022
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#85
of 350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,150
of 415,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 350 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 415,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.