↓ Skip to main content

Handgrip strength to predict extubation outcome: a prospective multicenter trial

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, October 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
25 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Handgrip strength to predict extubation outcome: a prospective multicenter trial
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, October 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13613-021-00932-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillaume Cottereau, Jonathan Messika, Bruno Megarbane, Laurent Guérin, Daniel da Silva, Caroline Bornstain, Matilde Santos, Jean-Damien Ricard, Benjamin Sztrymf

Abstract

ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW) has been shown to be associated with prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation and extubation failure. It is usually assessed through Medical Research Council (MRC) score, a time-consuming score performed by physiotherapists. Handgrip strength (HG) can be monitored very easily at the bedside. It has been shown to be a reproducible and reliable marker of global muscular strength in critical care patients. We sought to test if muscular weakness, as assessed by handgrip strength, was associated with extubation outcome. Prospective multicenter trial over an 18 months period in six mixed ICUs. Adults receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h were eligible. Just before weaning trial, HG, Maximal Inspiratory Pressure (MIP), Peak Cough Expiratory Flow (PCEF) and Medical Research Council (MRC) score were registered. The attending physicians were unaware of the tests results and weaning procedures were conducted according to guidelines. Occurrence of unscheduled reintubation, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or high-flow nasal continuous oxygen (HFNC) because of respiratory failure within 7 days after extubation defined extubation failure. The main outcome was the link between HG and extubation outcome. 233 patients were included. Extubation failure occurred in 51 (22.5%) patients, 39 (17.2%) required reintubation. Handgrip strength was 12 [6-20] kg and 12 [8-20] kg, respectively, in extubation success and failure (p = 0.85). There was no association between extubation outcome and MRC score, MIP or PCEF. Handgrip strength was well correlated with MRC score (r = 0.718, p < 0.0001). ICU and hospital length of stay were significantly higher in the subset of patients harboring muscular weakness as defined by handgrip performed at the first weaning trial (respectively, 15 [10-25] days vs. 11 [7-17] days, p = 0.001 and 34 [19-66] days vs. 22 [15-43] days, p = 0.002). No association was found between handgrip strength and extubation outcome. Whether this was explained by the appropriateness of the tool in this specific setting, or by the precise impact of ICUAW on extubation outcome deserves to be further evaluated. Trial registration Clinical Trials; NCT02946502, 10/27/2016, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=gripwean&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 10%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 21 54%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Engineering 4 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 21 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 22 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,665,052
of 24,746,716 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#203
of 1,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,129
of 426,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,746,716 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. 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 426,482 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.