↓ Skip to main content

Maintaining endotracheal tube cuff pressure at 20 mm Hg to prevent dysphagia after anterior cervical spine surgery; protocol of a double-blind randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Maintaining endotracheal tube cuff pressure at 20 mm Hg to prevent dysphagia after anterior cervical spine surgery; protocol of a double-blind randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-14-280
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark P Arts, Thijs C D Rettig, Jessica de Vries, Jasper F C Wolfs, Bas A in’t Veld

Abstract

In anterior cervical spine surgery a retractor is obligatory to approach the spine. Previous studies showed an increase of endotracheal tube cuff pressure after placement of a retractor. It is known that high endotracheal tube cuff pressure increases the incidence of postoperative dysphagia, hoarseness, and sore throat. However, until now no evidence supports the fact whether adjusting the endotracheal tube cuff pressure during anterior cervical spine surgery will prevent this comorbidity. We present the design of a randomized controlled trial to determine whether adjusting endotracheal tube cuff pressure after placement of a retractor during anterior cervical spine surgery will prevent postoperative dysphagia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 14 21%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 17 25%

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 26 September 2013.
All research outputs
#16,636,485
of 21,347,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,675
of 3,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,835
of 186,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,347,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 186,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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