↓ 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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
44 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 18 32%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 65%
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 13 23%

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
#1,198,278
of 21,641,192 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#134
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,270
of 392,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,641,192 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 392,887 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.