↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics and Outcomes of Intensive Care Unit Survivors: Experience of a Multidisciplinary Outpatient Clinic in a Teaching Hospital

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, December 2017
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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Characteristics and Outcomes of Intensive Care Unit Survivors: Experience of a Multidisciplinary Outpatient Clinic in a Teaching Hospital
Published in
Clinics, December 2017
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2017(12)08
Pubmed ID
Authors

Péricles A.D. Duarte, Jaquilene Barreto Costa, Silvana Trilo Duarte, Sheila Taba, Claudia Regina Felicetti Lordani, Erica Fernanda Osaku, Claudia Rejane Lima Macedo Costa, Dalas Cristina Miglioranza, Daniela Prochnow Gund, Amaury Cesar Jorge

Abstract

To describe the experience of an outpatient clinic with the multidisciplinary evaluation of intensive care unit survivors and to analyze their social, psychological, and physical characteristics in a low-income population and a developing country. Retrospective cohort study. Adult survivors from a general intensive care unit were evaluated three months after discharge in a post-intensive care unit outpatient multidisciplinary clinic over a period of 6 years (2008-2014) in a University Hospital in southern Brazil. A total of 688 out of 1945 intensive care unit survivors received care at the clinic. Of these, 45.2% had psychological disorders (particularly depression), 49.0% had respiratory impairments (abnormal spirometry), and 24.6% had moderate to intense dyspnea during daily life activities. Patients experienced weight loss during hospitalization (mean=11.7%) but good recovery after discharge (mean gain=9.1%), and 94.6% were receiving nutrition orally. One-third of patients showed a reduction of peripheral muscular strength, and 5.7% had moderate to severe tetraparesis or tetraplegia. There was a significant impairment in quality of life (SF-36), particularly in the physical and emotional aspects and in functional capacity. The economic impacts on the affected families, which were mostly low-income families, were considerable. Most patients did not have full access to rehabilitation services, even though half of the families were receiving financial support from the government. A significant number of intensive care unit survivors evaluated 3 months after discharge had psychological, respiratory, motor, and socioeconomic problems; these findings highlight that strategies aimed to assist critically ill patients should be extended to the post-hospitalization period and that this problem is particularly important in low-income populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Professor 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 56 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 15%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Psychology 3 2%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 64 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 31 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,605,790
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#513
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,084
of 444,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 444,941 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.