↓ Skip to main content

Influence of ICU-bed availability on ICU admission decisions

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Influence of ICU-bed availability on ICU admission decisions
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13613-015-0099-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

René Robert, Rémi Coudroy, Stéphanie Ragot, Olivier Lesieur, Isabelle Runge, Vincent Souday, Arnaud Desachy, Jean-Paul Gouello, Michel Hira, Mouldi Hamrouni, Jean Reignier

Abstract

The potential influence of bed availability on triage to intensive care unit (ICU) admission is among the factors that may influence the ideal ratio of ICU beds to population: thus, high bed availability (HBA) may result in the admission of patients too well or too sick to benefit, whereas bed scarcity may result in refusal of patients likely to benefit from ICU admission. Characteristics and outcomes of patient admitted in four ICUs with usual HBA, defined by admission refusal rate less than 11 % because of bed unavailability, were compared to patients admitted in six ICUs with usual low bed availability (LBA), i.e., an admission refusal rate higher than 10 % during a 90-day period. Over the 90 days, the mean number of days with no bed available was 30 ± 16 in HBA units versus 48 ± 21 in LBA units (p < 0.01). The proportion of admitted patients was significantly higher in the HBA (80.1 %; n = 659/823) than in the LBA units [61.6 %: n = 480/779; (p < 0.0001)]. The proportion of patients deemed too sick to benefit from admission was higher in LBA (9.0 %; n = 70) than in the HBA (6.3 %; n = 52) units (p < 0.05). The HBA group had a significantly greater proportion of patients younger than 40 years of age (22.5 %; n = 148 versus 14 %; n = 67 in LBA group; p < 0.001) and higher proportions of patients with either high or low simplified acute physiologic score II values. Bed availability affected triage decisions. Units with HBA trend to admit patients too sick or too well to benefit.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 %
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Postgraduate 9 14%
Student > Master 9 14%
Other 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Chemistry 2 3%
Mathematics 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 12 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 October 2020.
All research outputs
#7,230,052
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#628
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,468
of 393,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#12
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 393,187 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 60% of its contemporaries.