| Title |
Physiotherapy Care of Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) - A Brazilian Experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinics, June 2020
|
| DOI | 10.6061/clinics/2020/e2017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renato Fraga Righetti, Mirian Akemi Onoue, Flavia Vanessa Aurea Politi, Débora Trigo Teixeira, Patricia Nery de Souza, Claudia Seiko Kondo, Eliana Vieira Moderno, Igor Gutierrez Moraes, Ana Lígia Vasconcellos Maida, Laerte Pastore, Felipe Duarte Silva, Christina May Moran de Brito, Wania Regina Mollo Baia, Wellington Pereira Yamaguti |
| Abstract |
Some patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) present with severe acute respiratory syndrome, which causes multiple organ dysfunction, besides dysfunction of the respiratory system, that requires invasive procedures. On the basis of the opinions of front-line experts and a review of the relevant literature on several topics, we proposed clinical practice recommendations on the following aspects for physiotherapists facing challenges in treating patients and containing virus spread: 1. personal protective equipment, 2. conventional chest physiotherapy, 3. exercise and early mobilization, 4. oxygen therapy, 5. nebulizer treatment, 6. non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal oxygen, 7. endotracheal intubation, 8. protective mechanical ventilation, 9. management of mechanical ventilation in severe and refractory cases of hypoxemia, 10. prone positioning, 11. cuff pressure, 12. tube and nasotracheal suction, 13. humidifier use for ventilated patients, 14. methods of weaning ventilated patients and extubation, and 15. equipment and hand hygiene. These recommendations can serve as clinical practice guidelines for physiotherapists. This article details the development of guidelines on these aspects for physiotherapy of patients with COVID-19. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 30% |
| Brazil | 1 | 10% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 390 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 390 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 64 | 16% |
| Researcher | 30 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 4% |
| Other | 72 | 18% |
| Unknown | 162 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 74 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 69 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 9 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 44 | 11% |
| Unknown | 176 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 September 2021.
All research outputs
#5,392,815
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#207
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,044
of 434,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#16
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 434,644 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.