↓ Skip to main content

Outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome in university and non-university hospitals in Germany

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2017
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
64 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome in university and non-university hospitals in Germany
Published in
Critical Care, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1687-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Konstantinos Raymondos, Tamme Dirks, Michael Quintel, Ulrich Molitoris, Jörg Ahrens, Thorben Dieck, Kai Johanning, Dietrich Henzler, Rolf Rossaint, Christian Putensen, Hermann Wrigge, Ralph Wittich, Maximilian Ragaller, Thomas Bein, Martin Beiderlinden, Maxi Sanmann, Christian Rabe, Jörn Schlechtweg, Monika Holler, Fernando Frutos-Vivar, Andres Esteban, Hartmut Hecker, Simone Rosseau, Vera von Dossow, Claudia Spies, Tobias Welte, Siegfried Piepenbrock, Steffen Weber-Carstens, Konstantinos Raymondos, Tamme Dirks, Michael Quintel, Ulrich Molitoris, Jörg Ahrens, Thorben Dieck, Kai Johanning, Dietrich Henzler, Rolf Rossaint, Christian Putensen, Hermann Wrigge, Ralph Wittich, Maximilian Ragaller, Thomas Bein, Martin Beiderlinden, Maxi Sanmann, Christian Rabe, Jörn Schlechtweg, Monika Holler, Fernando Frutos-Vivar, Andres Esteban, Hartmut Hecker, Simone Rosseau, Vera von Dossow, Claudia Spies, Tobias Welte, Siegfried Piepenbrock, Steffen Weber-Carstens

Abstract

This study investigates differences in treatment and outcome of ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between university and non-university hospitals in Germany. This subanalysis of a prospective, observational cohort study was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality by examining: baseline factors, ventilator settings (e.g., driving pressure), complications, and care settings-for example, case volume of ventilated patients, size/type of intensive care unit (ICU), and type of hospital (university/non-university hospital). To control for potentially confounding factors at ARDS onset and to verify differences in mortality, ARDS patients in university vs non-university hospitals were compared using additional multivariable analysis. Of the 7540 patients admitted to 95 ICUs from 18 university and 62 non-university hospitals in May 2004, 1028 received mechanical ventilation and 198 developed ARDS. Although the characteristics of ARDS patients were very similar, hospital mortality was considerably lower in university compared with non-university hospitals (39.3% vs 57.5%; p = 0.012). Treatment in non-university hospitals was independently associated with increased mortality (OR (95% CI): 2.89 (1.31-6.38); p = 0.008). This was confirmed by additional independent comparisons between the two patient groups when controlling for confounding factors at ARDS onset. Higher driving pressures (OR 1.10; 1 cmH2O increments) were also independently associated with higher mortality. Compared with non-university hospitals, higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (mean ± SD: 11.7 ± 4.7 vs 9.7 ± 3.7 cmH2O; p = 0.005) and lower driving pressures (15.1 ± 4.4 vs 17.0 ± 5.0 cmH2O; p = 0.02) were applied during therapeutic ventilation in university hospitals, and ventilation lasted twice as long (median (IQR): 16 (9-29) vs 8 (3-16) days; p < 0.001). Mortality risk of ARDS patients was considerably higher in non-university compared with university hospitals. Differences in ventilatory care between hospitals might explain this finding and may at least partially imply regionalization of care and the export of ventilatory strategies to non-university hospitals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 23%
Researcher 4 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Lecturer 2 8%
Other 8 31%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 58%
Engineering 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unknown 6 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 28 September 2018.
All research outputs
#525,672
of 14,563,510 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#444
of 4,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,275
of 269,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#7
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,563,510 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 4,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 269,195 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.