| Title |
Hypercapnic COPD patients and NIV at home: is there any benefit? Using the CAT and BODE index in an effort to prove benefits of NIV in these patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s152574 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andriani Zikyri, Chaido Pastaka, Konstantinos I Gourgoulianis |
| Abstract |
The benefits of long-term noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in stable COPD with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure (CHRF) have been debated for many years due to the conflicting results observed in these patients. We investigated the effects of domiciliary NIV in stable hypercapnic COPD patients for a period of 1 year using COPD Assessment Test (CAT), BODE Index, and the number of acute exacerbations. NIV was administered in 57 stable COPD patients with CHRF in the spontaneous/timed mode. Spirometry, 6 minute walk test, Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, arterial blood gases, number of acute exacerbations, BODE Index, and CAT were assessed. Study participants were reassessed in the 1st, 6th, and 12th months after the initial evaluation. There was a significant improvement in COPD exacerbations (p<0.001), CAT (p<0.001), PO2 (p<0.001), PCO2 (p<0.001), and Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (p<0.001) in 1 year of follow-up. BODE Index was improved in the first 6 months (5.8±2.2 vs 4.8±2.4, p<0.001), but the improvement was not maintained. In conclusion, domiciliary NIV in stable COPD patients with CHRF has beneficial effect on CAT, arterial blood gases, and number of acute exacerbations in a year of NIV use at home. A significant improvement in BODE Index from baseline to 12 months was found in patients aged >70 years, while for those aged <70, the improvement was not maintained after the sixth month. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 18 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 19 | 51% |
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 14 August 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,614
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,510
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#45
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 341,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.