↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Impact of around-the-clock in-house cardiology fellow coverage on door-to-balloon time in an academic medical center

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Impact of around-the-clock in-house cardiology fellow coverage on door-to-balloon time in an academic medical center
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s132405
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luke C Kohan, Vijaiganesh Nagarajan, Michael A Millard, Michael J Loguidice, Nancy M Fauber, Ellen C Keeley

Abstract

To assess if a change in our cardiology fellowship program impacted our ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) program. Fellows covering the cardiac care unit were spending excessive hours in the hospital while on call, resulting in increased duty hours violations. A night float fellow system was started on July 1, 2012, allowing the cardiac care unit fellow to sign out to a night float fellow at 5:30 pm. The night float fellow remained in-house until the morning. We performed a retrospective study assessing symptom onset to arrival, arterial access to first device, and door-to-balloon (D2B) times, in consecutive STEMI patients presenting to our emergency department before and after initiation of the night float fellow system. From 2009 to 2013, 208 STEMI patients presented to our emergency department and underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention. There was no difference in symptom onset to arrival (150±102 minutes vs 154±122 minutes, p=0.758), arterial access to first device (12±8 minutes vs 11±7 minutes, p=0.230), or D2B times (50±32 minutes vs 52±34 minutes, p=0.681) during regular working hours. However, there was a significant decrease in D2B times seen during off-hours (72±33 minutes vs 49±15 minutes, p=0.007). There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (11% vs 8%, p=0.484) or need for intra-aortic balloon pump placement (7% vs 8%, p=0.793). In academic medical centers, in-house cardiology fellow coverage during off-hours may expedite care of STEMI patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 19%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 18 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#437
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,500
of 323,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 323,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.