↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Variables Associated with Hydration Status in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with Dysphagia

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia (0179051X), October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 800)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Variables Associated with Hydration Status in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with Dysphagia
Published in
Dysphagia (0179051X), October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00455-015-9658-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A. Crary, Giselle D. Carnaby, Yasmeen Shabbir, Leslie Miller, Scott Silliman

Abstract

Acute stroke patients with dysphagia are at increased risk for poor hydration. Dysphagia management practices may directly impact hydration status. This study examined clinical factors that might impact hydration status in acute ischemic stroke patients with dysphagia. A retrospective chart review was completed on 67 ischemic stroke patients who participated in a prior study of nutrition and hydration status during acute care. Prior results indicated that patients with dysphagia demonstrated elevated BUN/Cr compared to non-dysphagia cases during acute care and that BUN/Cr increased selectively in dysphagic patients. This chart review evaluated clinical variables potentially impacting hydration status: diuretics, parenteral fluids, tube feeding, oral diet, and nonoral (NPO) status. Exposure to any variable and number of days of exposure to each variable were examined. Dysphagia cases demonstrated significantly more NPO days, tube fed days, and parenteral fluid days, but not oral fed days, or days on diuretics. BUN/Cr values at discharge were not associated with NPO days, parenteral fluid days, oral fed days, or days on diuretics. Patients on modified solid diets had significantly higher mean BUN/Cr values at discharge (27.12 vs. 17.23) as did tube fed patients (28.94 vs. 18.66). No difference was noted between these subgroups at baseline (regular diet vs. modified solids diets). Any modification of solid diets (31.11 vs. 17.23) or thickened liquids (28.50 vs. 17.81) resulted in significantly elevated BUN/Cr values at discharge. Liquid or diet modifications prescribed for acute stroke patients with dysphagia may impair hydration status in these patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Other 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Unspecified 5 10%
Other 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Unspecified 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 3 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 27 December 2018.
All research outputs
#801,090
of 13,133,981 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#44
of 800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,200
of 281,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,133,981 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 281,365 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.