↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effects of indacaterol versus tiotropium on respiratory mechanics assessed by the forced oscillation technique in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Effects of indacaterol versus tiotropium on respiratory mechanics assessed by the forced oscillation technique in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/copd.s87058
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naoki Inui, Sayomi Matsushima, Shinpei Kato, Hideki Yasui, Masato Kono, Tomoyuki Fujisawa, Noriyuki Enomoto, Yutaro Nakamura, Mikio Toyoshima, Takafumi Suda

Abstract

The forced oscillation technique (FOT) can measure respiratory mechanics and has attracted attention in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to evaluate the effects of only indacaterol and tiotropium monotherapies on airflow limitation and respiratory impedance. Pulmonary function tests, COPD assessment test (CAT), and multifrequency FOT with MostGraph-01 were performed at the beginning and after 8 weeks of treatment with indacaterol or tiotropium. The resistance index, resistance at 5 Hz (R5), resistance at 20 Hz (R20), reactance index, reactance at 5 Hz (X5), resonant frequency (Fres), and low-frequency reactance area (ALX) were determined at whole-breath, inspiratory, and expiratory phases. Eighty-two patients (mean age: 73 years; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1): 61.6%±19.0% predicted) were randomized to indacaterol or tiotropium treatment. Both bronchodilators improved airflow limitation, with mean trough improvements in FEV1 of 165 mL and 80 mL in the indacaterol and tiotropium groups, respectively. The CAT score decreased in the indacaterol group (P<0.001; 11.2±6.6 to 7.5±5.6). Compared with tiotropium, indacaterol significantly improved FEV1, percent predicted FEV1, and CAT score (P=0.042, P=0.008, and P=0.027, respectively). For respiratory impedance, indacaterol and tiotropium changed R5, X5, Fres, and ALX at whole-breath, inspiratory, and expiratory phases. In the indacaterol group, the changes in R5, R5-R20, X5, Fres, and ALX were significantly correlated with the changes in FEV1. The use of the FOT may enable the evaluation of the effects of bronchodilators in addition to FEV1-indicated therapeutic effects in COPD.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 24%
Researcher 12 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 13 26%
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 18 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,731
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,502
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#37
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.