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 |
Out-of-hospital airway management during manual compression or automated chest compression devices
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Die Anaesthesiologie, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00101-017-0401-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Bernhard, N. H. Behrens, J. Wnent, S. Seewald, S. Brenner, T. Jantzen, A. Bohn, J. T. Gräsner, M. Fischer |
| Abstract |
Airway management during resuscitation is pivotal for treating hypoxia and inducing reoxygenation. This German Resuscitation Registry (GRR) analysis investigated the influence of the type of airway used in patients treated with manual chest compression (mCC) and automated chest compression devices (ACCD) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Out of 42,977 patients (1 January 2010-30 June 2016) information on outcome, airway management and method of chest compressions were available for 27,544 patients. Hospital admission under cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), hospital admission with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital discharge and discharge with cerebral performance categories 1 and 2 (CPC 1,2) were used to compare outcome in patients treated with mCC vs. ACCD, and classified by endotracheal intubation (ETI), initial supraglottic airway device (SAD) changed into ETI, and only SAD use. Outcomes for hospital admission under ongoing CPR, hospital admission with ROSC, hospital discharge and neurologically intact survival (CPC 1,2) for mCC (84.8%) vs. ACCD (15.2%) groups were: 8.4/38.6%, 39.2/27.2%, 10.6/6.8%, 7.9/4.7% (p < 0.001), respectively. Only mCC with SAD/ETI for ever ROSC (OR 1.466, 95% CI: 1.353-1.588, p < 0.001) and mCC group with SAD/ETI for hospital admission with ROSC showed better outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.277, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.179-1.384, p < 0.001) in comparison to mCC treated with ETI. Compared to mCC/ETI, all other groups were associated with a decrease in neurologically intact survival. Better outcomes were found for mCC in comparison to ACCD and ETI showed better outcomes in comparison to SAD only. This observational registry study raised the hypothesis that SAD only should be avoided or SAD should be changed into ETI, independent of whether mCC or ACCD is used. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 19% |
| Germany | 3 | 19% |
| Sweden | 2 | 13% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Thailand | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 31% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 5 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,250,578
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Die Anaesthesiologie
#22
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,379
of 450,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Anaesthesiologie
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 450,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.