↓ Skip to main content

Patient–ventilator asynchrony during conventional mechanical ventilation in children

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, December 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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Patient–ventilator asynchrony during conventional mechanical ventilation in children
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-017-0344-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillaume Mortamet, Alexandrine Larouche, Laurence Ducharme-Crevier, Olivier Fléchelles, Gabrielle Constantin, Sandrine Essouri, Amélie-Ann Pellerin-Leblanc, Jennifer Beck, Christer Sinderby, Philippe Jouvet, Guillaume Emeriaud

Abstract

We aimed (1) to describe the characteristics of patient-ventilator asynchrony in a population of critically ill children, (2) to describe the risk factors associated with patient-ventilator asynchrony, and (3) to evaluate the association between patient-ventilator asynchrony and ventilator-free days at day 28. In this single-center prospective study, consecutive children admitted to the PICU and mechanically ventilated for at least 24 h were included. Patient-ventilator asynchrony was analyzed by comparing the ventilator pressure curve and the electrical activity of the diaphragm (Edi) signal with (1) a manual analysis and (2) using a standardized fully automated method. Fifty-two patients (median age 6 months) were included in the analysis. Eighteen patients had a very low ventilatory drive (i.e., peak Edi < 2 µV on average), which prevented the calculation of patient-ventilator asynchrony. Children spent 27% (interquartile 22-39%) of the time in conflict with the ventilator. Cycling-off errors and trigger delays contributed to most of this asynchronous time. The automatic algorithm provided a NeuroSync index of 45%, confirming the high prevalence of asynchrony. No association between the severity of asynchrony and ventilator-free days at day 28 or any other clinical secondary outcomes was observed, but the proportion of children with good synchrony was very low. Patient-ventilator interaction is poor in children supported by conventional ventilation, with a high frequency of depressed ventilatory drive and a large proportion of time spent in asynchrony. The clinical benefit of strategies to improve patient-ventilator interactions should be evaluated in pediatric critical care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Other 8 13%
Student > Master 6 9%
Researcher 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Computer Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 22 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 31 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,074,598
of 25,208,845 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#413
of 1,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,236
of 453,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#9
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,208,845 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,174 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 453,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.