↓ Skip to main content

Trends in use and impact on outcome of empiric antibiotic therapy and non-invasive ventilation in COPD patients with acute exacerbation

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Trends in use and impact on outcome of empiric antibiotic therapy and non-invasive ventilation in COPD patients with acute exacerbation
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13613-015-0072-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Islem Ouanes, Lamia Ouanes-Besbes, Saoussen Ben Abdallah, Fahmi Dachraoui, Fekri Abroug

Abstract

Empiric antibiotic therapy is routinely prescribed in patients with acute COPD exacerbations (AECOPD) requiring ventilatory support on the basis of studies including patients conventionally ventilated. Whether this practice remains valid to current management with first-line non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is unclear. In a cohort of ICU patients admitted between 2000 and 2012 for AECOPD, we analyzed the trends in empiric antibiotic therapy and in primary ventilatory support strategy, and their respective impact on patients' outcome. 440 patients admitted for 552 episodes were included; primary NIV use increased from 29 to 96.7 % (p < 0.001), whereas NIV failure rate decreased significantly (p = 0.004). In parallel, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) rate, VAP density and empiric antibiotic therapy use decreased (p = 0.037, p = 0.002, and p < 0.001, respectively). These figures were associated with a trend toward lower ICU mortality rate (p = 0.058). Logistic regression showed that primary NIV use per se was protective against fatal outcome [odds ratios (OR) = 0.08, 95 %CI 0.03-0.22; p < 0.001], whereas NIV failure, VAP occurrence, and cardiovascular comorbidities were associated with increased ICU mortality [OR = 17.6 (95 %CI 5.29-58.93), 11.5 (95 %CI 5.17-25.45), and 3 (95 %CI 1.37-6.63), respectively]. Empiric antibiotic therapy was associated with decreased VAP rate (log rank; p < 0.001), but had no effect on mortality (log rank; p = 0.793). The sustained increase in NIV use allowed a decrease in empiric antibiotic prescriptions in AECOPD requiring ventilatory support. Primary NIV use and its success, but not empiric antibiotic therapy, were associated with a favorable impact on patients' outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 14%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Other 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 November 2015.
All research outputs
#13,685,294
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#717
of 1,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,365
of 276,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#9
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 276,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 50% of its contemporaries.