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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of the Airtraq laryngoscope and the GlideScope for double-lumen tube intubation in patients with predicted normal airways: a prospective randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-015-0037-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jie Yi, Yahong Gong, Xiang Quan, Yuguang Huang |
| Abstract |
The Airtraq laryngoscope and the GlideScope are commonly used in many airway scenarios. However, their features have not been fully described for double-lumen tube intubation. A prospective randomized study was designed to compare their intubation performances in thoracic surgery patients. Seventy ASA physical status I and II patients with predicted normal airway were scheduled for thoracic surgeries with double-lumen tube intubation. They were randomly assigned to one of two groups and intubated with either the Airtraq laryngoscope (group A, n = 35) or the GlideScope (group G, n = 35). Airway assessments were performed prior to anesthesia, and all patients were induced with a standard anesthetic regimen. The Cormack-Lehane grades were initially evaluated with a Macintosh laryngoscope and subsequently with the group-specific laryngoscope before intubation. Intubation time was recorded as the primary outcome. The Cormack-Lehane grade, the success of the first intubation attempt, the intubation difficulty scales and ease of tube advancement were noted. Hemodynamic variables during intubation and incidence of post-operative sore throat were documented as well. The intubation time of group A was shorter than that of group G (36.6 ± 20.2 s vs. 54.6 ± 25.7 s, p = 0.002). The Cormack-Lehane grade (I/II/III/IV) was significantly better in group A (33/2/0/0 vs. 28/7/0/0, p = 0.042). The mean arterial pressure and heart rate rose to higher levels during intubation with the GlideScope than with the Airtraq laryngoscope. The success of the first intubation attempt and the intubation difficulty scales were comparable between the two groups. The numbers of patients who experienced postoperative sore throat were similar (6 vs. 8) in the two groups. Compared with the GlideScope, the specially designed Airtraq laryngoscope might be more suitable for double-lumen tube intubations in patients with predicted normal airway. www.chictr.org Identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-11001628. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 20% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
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 19 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,407,102
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#990
of 1,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,642
of 264,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#27
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,496 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 264,516 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.