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 |
Bispectral index to guide induction of anesthesia: a randomized controlled study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-018-0522-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dirk Rüsch, Christian Arndt, Leopold Eberhart, Scarlett Tappert, Dennis Nageldick, Hinnerk Wulf |
| Abstract |
It is unknown to what extent hypotension frequently observed following administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia is caused by overdosing propofol. Unlike clinical signs, electroencephalon-based cerebral monitoring allows to detect and quantify an overdose of hypnotics. Therefore, we tested whether the use of an electroencephalon-based cerebral monitoring will cause less hypotension following induction with propofol. Subjects were randomly assigned to a bispectral index (BIS)-guided (target range 40-60) or to a weight-related (2 mg.kg- 1) manual administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypotension following the administration of propofol. Secondary endpoints included the degree of hypotension and correlations between BIS and drop in mean arterial pressure (MAP). Incidences were analyzed with Fisher's Exact-test. Of the 240 patients enrolled into this study, 235 predominantly non-geriatric (median 48 years, 25th - 75th percentile 35-61 years) patients without severe concomitant disease (88% American Society of Anesthesiology physical status 1-2) undergoing ear, nose and throat surgery, ophthalmic surgery, and dermatologic surgery were analyzed. Patients who were manually administered propofol guided by BIS (n = 120) compared to those who were given propofol by weight (n = 115) did not differ concerning the incidence of hypotension (44% vs. 45%; p = 0.87). Study groups were also similar regarding the maximal drop in MAP compared to baseline (33% vs. 30%) and the proportion of hypotensive events related to all measurements (17% vs. 19%). Final propofol induction doses in BIS group and NON-BIS group were similar (1.93 mg/kg vs. 2 mg/kg). There was no linear correlation between BIS and the drop in MAP at all times (r < 0.2 for all) except for a weak one at 6 min (r = 0.221). Results of our study suggest that a BIS-guided compared to a weight-adjusted manual administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia in non-geriatric patients will not lower the incidence and degree of arterial hypotension. German Registry of Clinical Trials ( DRKS00010544 ), retrospectively registered on August 4, 2016. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 13% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 36% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 41% |
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 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,980,413
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#857
of 1,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,431
of 328,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#22
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 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 1,516 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. 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 328,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.