↓ Skip to main content

Targeted Temperature Management and Multimodality Monitoring of Comatose Patients After Cardiac Arrest

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Targeted Temperature Management and Multimodality Monitoring of Comatose Patients After Cardiac Arrest
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00768
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peggy L. Nguyen, Laith Alreshaid, Roy A. Poblete, Geoffrey Konye, Jonathan Marehbian, Gene Sung

Abstract

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) remains a leading cause of sudden morbidity and mortality; however, outcomes have continued to improve in the era of targeted temperature management (TTM). In this review, we highlight the clinical use of TTM, and provide an updated summary of multimodality monitoring possible in a modern ICU. TTM is neuroprotective for survivors of CA by inhibiting multiple pathophysiologic processes caused by anoxic brain injury, with a final common pathway of neuronal death. Current guidelines recommend the use of TTM for out-of-hospital CA survivors who present with a shockable rhythm. Further studies are being completed to determine the optimal timing, depth and duration of hypothermia to optimize patient outcomes. Although a multidisciplinary approach is necessary in the CA population, neurologists and neurointensivists are central in selecting TTM candidates and guiding patient care and prognostic evaluation. Established prognostic tools include clinal exam, SSEP, EEG and MR imaging, while functional MRI and invasive monitoring is not validated to improve outcomes in CA or aid in prognosis. We recommend that an evidence-based TTM and prognostication algorithm be locally implemented, based on each institution's resources and limitations. Given the high incidence of CA and difficulty in predicting outcomes, further study is urgently needed to determine the utility of more recent multimodality devices and studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 11 24%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Unspecified 2 4%
Chemistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 November 2018.
All research outputs
#15,018,906
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,208
of 12,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,699
of 337,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#135
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 337,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 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.