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 |
Implementation of a dispatch-instruction protocol for cardiopulmonary resuscitation according to various abnormal breathing patterns: a population-based study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13049-015-0145-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hidetada Fukushima, Masami Imanishi, Taku Iwami, Hironori Kitaoka, Hideki Asai, Tadahiko Seki, Yasuyuki Kawai, Kazunobu Norimoto, Yasuyuki Urisono, Kenji Nishio, Kazuo Okuchi |
| Abstract |
We modified the dispatch protocol for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using results of a retrospective analysis that identified descriptions by laypersons of possible patterns of agonal respiration. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of this modified protocol by comparing the frequency of dispatch instructions for CPR and bystander CPR before and after protocol implementation. We also identified descriptions of abnormal breathing patterns among 'Not in cardiac arrest (CA)' unresponsive cases. This study was conducted prospectively using the population-based registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs). For 8 months we implemented this modified protocol in cooperation with 4 fire departments that cover regions with a total population of 840,000. There were 478 and 427 OHCAs before and after implementation, respectively. Among them, 69 and 71 layperson-witnessed OHCAs for pre- and post-implementation, respectively, were analyzed. Dispatchers provided CPR instructions more frequently after protocol implementation than before (55/71 [77.5 %] vs. 41/69 [59.4 %], p < 0.05). Based on breathing patterns described by emergency callers, dispatchers assessed 143 'Not in CA' unresponsive cases and provided CPR instruction for 45 cases. Sensitivity and specificity of this protocol was 93 % and 50 %, respectively. This modified protocol based on abnormal breathing described by laypersons significantly increased CPR instructions. Considering high sensitivity and low specificity for abnormal breathing to identify CA and the low risk of chest compression for 'Not in CA' cases, our study suggested that dispatchers can provide CPR instruction assertively and safely for those unresponsive individuals with various abnormal breathing patterns. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 42 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 39% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
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 19 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,054,098
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#617
of 1,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,815
of 273,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#8
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 273,932 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.