↓ Skip to main content

Dysphagia and Associated Risk Factors Following Extubation in Cardiovascular Surgical Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia (0179051X), August 2014
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

25 tweeters
2 Facebook pages


34 Dimensions

Readers on

51 Mendeley
Dysphagia and Associated Risk Factors Following Extubation in Cardiovascular Surgical Patients
Published in
Dysphagia (0179051X), August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00455-014-9555-4
Pubmed ID

Stacey A. Skoretz, Terrence M. Yau, Joan Ivanov, John T. Granton, Rosemary Martino


Following cardiovascular (CV) surgery, prolonged mechanical ventilation of >48 h increases dysphagia frequency over tenfold: 51 % compared to 3-4 % across all durations. Our primary objective was to identify dysphagia frequency following CV surgery with respect to intubation duration. Our secondary objective was to explore characteristics associated with dysphagia across the entire sample. Using a retrospective design, we stratified all consecutive patients who underwent CV surgery in 2009 at our institution into intubation duration groups defined a priori: I (≤12 h), II (>12 to ≤24 h), III (>24 to ≤48 h), and IV (>48 h). Eligible patients were >18 years old who survived extubation following coronary artery bypass alone or cardiac valve surgery. Patients who underwent tracheotomy were excluded. Pre-, peri-, and postoperative patient variables were extracted from a pre-existing database and medical charts by two blinded reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Across the entire sample, multivariable logistic regression analysis determined independent predictors of dysphagia. Across the entire sample, dysphagia frequency was 5.6 % (51/909) but varied by group: I, 1 % (7/699); II, 8.2 % (11/134); III, 16.7 % (6/36); and IV, 67.5 % (27/40). Across the entire sample, the independent predictors of dysphagia included intubation duration in 12-h increments (p < 0.001; odds ratio [OR] 1.93, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.63-2.29) and age in 10-year increments (p = 0.004; OR 2.12, 95 % CI 1.27-3.52). Patients had a twofold increase in their odds of developing dysphagia for every additional 12 h with endotracheal intubation and for every additional decade in age. These patients should undergo post-extubation swallow assessments to minimize complications.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 49 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Unspecified 5 10%
Other 18 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Unspecified 8 16%
Psychology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,458,925 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia (0179051X)
of 825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 198,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia (0179051X)
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,458,925 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 825 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 198,852 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 15 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.