↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of exercise intensity during four early rehabilitation techniques in sedated and ventilated patients in ICU: a randomised cross-over trial

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2018
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
67 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
355 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
Comparison of exercise intensity during four early rehabilitation techniques in sedated and ventilated patients in ICU: a randomised cross-over trial
Published in
Critical Care, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2030-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clément Medrinal, Yann Combret, Guillaume Prieur, Aurora Robledo Quesada, Tristan Bonnevie, Francis Edouard Gravier, Elise Dupuis Lozeron, Eric Frenoy, Olivier Contal, Bouchra Lamia

Abstract

In the ICU, out-of-bed rehabilitation is often delayed and in-bed exercises are generally low-intensity. Since the majority of rehabilitation is carried out in bed, it is essential to carry out the exercises that have the highest intensity. The aim of this study was to compare the physiological effects of four common types of bed exercise in intubated, sedated patients confined to bed in the ICU, in order to determine which was the most intensive. A randomised, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial was carried out to evaluate the effects of four bed exercises (passive range of movements (PROM), passive cycle-ergometry, quadriceps electrical stimulation and functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling) on cardiac output. Each exercise was carried out for ten minutes in ventilated, sedated patients. Cardiac output was recorded using cardiac Doppler ultrasound. The secondary aims were to evaluate right heart function and pulmonary and systemic artery pressures during the exercises, and the microcirculation of the vastus lateralis muscle. The results were analysed in 19 patients. FES cycling was the only exercise that increased cardiac output, with a mean increase of 1 L/min (15%). There was a concomitant increase in muscle oxygen uptake, suggesting that muscle work occurred. FES cycling thus constitutes an effective early rehabilitation intervention. No muscle or systemic effects were induced by the passive techniques. Most bed exercises were low-intensity and induced low levels of muscle work. FES cycling was the only exercise that increased cardiac output and produced sufficient intensity of muscle work. Longer-term studies of the effect of FES cycling on functional outcomes should be carried out. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02920684 . Registered on 30 September 2016. Prospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 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 355 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 355 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 12%
Student > Bachelor 39 11%
Other 24 7%
Researcher 24 7%
Student > Postgraduate 21 6%
Other 70 20%
Unknown 134 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 67 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 67 19%
Sports and Recreations 10 3%
Engineering 10 3%
Neuroscience 9 3%
Other 35 10%
Unknown 157 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,045,939
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#823
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,924
of 339,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#28
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 339,645 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 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.