↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Success of applying early goal-directed therapy for septic shock patients in the emergency department

Overview of attention for article published in Open access emergency medicine OAEM, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Success of applying early goal-directed therapy for septic shock patients in the emergency department
Published in
Open access emergency medicine OAEM, January 2016
DOI 10.2147/oaem.s86129
Pubmed ID
Authors

Panita Worapratya, Apisit Wanjaroenchaisuk, Jutharat Joraluck, Prasit Wuthisuthimethawee

Abstract

Since early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) became standard care in severe sepsis and septic shock patients in intensive care units many years ago, we suppose that the survival rate of severe sepsis and septic shock patients improves if the resuscitative procedure is quickly implemented and is initiated in the emergency room. We aimed at recording emergency department time to improve our patient care system as well as determine the rate at which EGDT goals can be achieved. The second analysis is to find out how much we can improve the survival rate. This was a prospective observational study in an emergency room setting at a tertiary care facility where EGDT was applied for resuscitation of severe sepsis and septic shock patients. The data recorded were the initial vital signs, APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) score, SAP II (Simplified Acute Physiology II) score, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) score, time at which EGDT goals were achieved (central venous oxygen saturation [ScvO2] >70%), initial and final diagnosis, and outcome of treatment. The t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare between the achieved goal and nonachieved goal groups. There were 63 cases of severe sepsis in the study period. Only 55 patients submitted a signed consent form and had central line insertion. Twenty-eight (50.9%) cases were male. Thirty-nine (70.9%) patients achieved the goal, and the mean SAP II score was 8. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P-value =0.097). Thirty of the 39 patients (70.9%) survived in the achieved goal group, which was a statistically significant improvement of the survival rate when compared with only one of 16 patients (6.3%) surviving in the nonachieved goal group (P<0.001).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 18%
Unspecified 1 2%
Chemistry 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 22%
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 20 February 2016.
All research outputs
#7,856,238
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Open access emergency medicine OAEM
#74
of 224 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,737
of 400,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open access emergency medicine OAEM
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
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 400,858 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them