↓ Skip to main content

Energy expenditure in critically ill patients estimated by population-based equations, indirect calorimetry and CO2-based indirect calorimetry

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Energy expenditure in critically ill patients estimated by population-based equations, indirect calorimetry and CO2-based indirect calorimetry
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13613-016-0118-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Lillelund Rousing, Mie Hviid Hahn-Pedersen, Steen Andreassen, Ulrike Pielmeier, Jean-Charles Preiser

Abstract

Indirect calorimetry (IC) is the reference method for measurement of energy expenditure (EE) in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. When IC is unavailable, EE can be calculated by predictive equations or by VCO2-based calorimetry. This study compares the bias, quality and accuracy of these methods. EE was determined by IC over a 30-min period in patients from a mixed medical/postsurgical intensive care unit and compared to seven predictive equations and to VCO2-based calorimetry. The bias was described by the mean difference between predicted EE and IC, the quality by the root mean square error (RMSE) of the difference and the accuracy by the number of patients with estimates within 10 % of IC. Errors of VCO2-based calorimetry due to choice of respiratory quotient (RQ) were determined by a sensitivity analysis, and errors due to fluctuations in ventilation were explored by a qualitative analysis. In 18 patients (mean age 61 ± 17 years, five women), EE averaged 2347 kcal/day. All predictive equations were accurate in less than 50 % of the patients with an RMSE ≥ 15 %. VCO2-based calorimetry was accurate in 89 % of patients, significantly better than all predictive equations, and remained better for any choice of RQ within published range (0.76-0.89). Errors due to fluctuations in ventilation are about equal in IC and VCO2-based calorimetry, and filtering reduced these errors. This study confirmed the inaccuracy of predictive equations and established VCO2-based calorimetry as a more accurate alternative. Both IC and VCO2-based calorimetry are sensitive to fluctuations in respiration.

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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Student > Master 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Other 27 27%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 14%
Engineering 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 18 18%
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 22 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,789,675
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#881
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,684
of 298,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#18
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 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 1,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. 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 298,014 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.