↓ Skip to main content

Early risk factors and the role of fluid administration in developing acute respiratory distress syndrome in septic patients

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, January 2017
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
43 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Early risk factors and the role of fluid administration in developing acute respiratory distress syndrome in septic patients
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-017-0233-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raghu R. Seethala, Peter C. Hou, Imoigele P. Aisiku, Gyorgy Frendl, Pauline K. Park, Mark E. Mikkelsen, Steven Y. Chang, Ognjen Gajic, Jonathan Sevransky

Abstract

Sepsis is a major risk factor for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, there remains a paucity of literature examining risk factors for ARDS in septic patients early in their course. This study examined the role of early fluid administration and identified other risk factors within the first 6 h of hospital presentation associated with developing ARDS in septic patients. This was a secondary analysis of septic adult patients presenting to the Emergency Department or being admitted for high-risk elective surgery from the multicenter observational cohort study, US Critical Injury and Illness trial Group-Lung Injury Prevention Study 1 (USCIITG-LIPS 1, NCT00889772). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify potential early risk factors for ARDS. Stratified analysis by shock status was performed to examine the association between early fluid administration and ARDS. Of the 5584 patients in the original study cohort, 2534 (45.4%) met our criteria for sepsis. One hundred and fifty-six (6.2%) of these patients developed ARDS during the hospital stay. In multivariable analyses, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.07-1.13), age (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98), total fluid infused in the first 6 h (in liters) (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03-1.29), shock (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.62-4.08), pneumonia as a site of infection (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.59-3.36), pancreatitis (OR 3.86, 95% CI 1.33-11.24), and acute abdomen (OR 3.77, 95% CI 1.37-10.41) were associated with developing ARDS. In the stratified analysis, total fluid infused in the first 6 h (in liters) (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.87-1.28) was not associated with the development of ARDS in the shock group, while there was an association in the non-shock group (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.38). In septic patients, the following risk factors identified within the first 6 h of hospital presentation were associated with ARDS: APACHE II score, presence of shock, pulmonary source of infection, pancreatitis, and presence of an acute abdomen. In septic patients without shock, the amount of fluid infused during the first 6 h of hospital presentation was associated with developing ARDS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 18 27%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 62%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Linguistics 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 18 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 09 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,583,553
of 25,918,104 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#181
of 1,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,365
of 427,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,104 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 1,211 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 85% 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 427,649 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.