↓ Skip to main content

Increase in intra-abdominal pressure during airway suctioning-induced cough after a successful spontaneous breathing trial is associated with extubation outcome

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Increase in intra-abdominal pressure during airway suctioning-induced cough after a successful spontaneous breathing trial is associated with extubation outcome
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13613-018-0410-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasuhiro Norisue, Jun Kataoka, Yosuke Homma, Takaki Naito, Junpei Tsukuda, Kentaro Okamoto, Takeshi Kawaguchi, Lonny Ashworth, Shimada Yumiko, Yuiko Hoshina, Eiji Hiraoka, Shigeki Fujitani

Abstract

A patient's ability to clear secretions and protect the airway with an effective cough is an important part of the pre-extubation evaluation. An increase in intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is important in generating the flow rate necessary for a cough. This study investigated whether an increase from baseline in IAP during a coughing episode induced by routine pre-extubation airway suctioning is associated with extubation outcome after a successful spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). Three hundred thirty-five (335) mechanically ventilated patients who passed an SBT were enrolled. Baseline IAP and peak IAP during successive suctioning-induced coughs were measured with a fluid column connected to a Foley catheter. Extubation was unsuccessful in 24 patients (7.2%). Unsuccessful extubation was 3.40 times as likely for patients with a delta IAP (ΔIAP) of ≤ 30 cm H2O than for those with a ΔIAP > 30 cm H2O, after adjusting for APACHE II score (95% CI, 1.39-8.26; p = .007). ΔIAP during a coughing episode induced by routine pre-extubation airway suctioning is significantly associated with extubation outcome in patients with a successful SBT. Trial registration UMIN-CTR Clinical Trial, UMIN000017762. Registered 1 June 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 21%
Engineering 2 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,948,821
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#892
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,592
of 327,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#25
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.