↓ Skip to main content

Prospective study of the primary evaluation of 1016 horses with clinical signs of abdominal pain by veterinary practitioners, and the differentiation of critical and non-critical cases

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#33 of 837)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Prospective study of the primary evaluation of 1016 horses with clinical signs of abdominal pain by veterinary practitioners, and the differentiation of critical and non-critical cases
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13028-015-0160-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laila Curtis, John Harold Burford, Jennifer Sara Marian Thomas, Marise Linda Curran, Tom Curtis Bayes, Gary Crane William England, Sarah Louise Freeman

Abstract

The majority of research on the evaluation of horses with colic is focused on referral hospital populations. Early identification of critical cases is important to optimise outcome and welfare. The aim of this prospective study was to survey the primary evaluation of horses with clinical signs of abdominal pain by veterinary practitioners, and compare the initial presentation of critical and non-critical cases. Data from 1016 primary evaluations of horses presenting with clinical signs of colic were submitted by 167 veterinary practitioners across the United Kingdom over a 13 month period. The mean age of the study population was 13.5 years (median 12.0, range 0-42). Mean heart rate on primary presentation was 47 beats/min (median 44, range 18-125), mean respiratory rate was 20 breaths/min (median 16, range 6-100), and median gastrointestinal auscultation score (0-12, minimum-maximum) was 5 (range 0-12). Clinical signs assessed using a behavioural severity score (0-17, minimum-maximum), were between 0 and 6 in 70.4 % of cases, and 7-12 for 29.6 % of cases. Rectal examination was performed in 73.8 % of cases. Cases that responded positively to simple medical treatment were categorised retrospectively as 'non-critical'; cases that required intensive medical treatment, surgical intervention, died or were euthanased were categorised as 'critical'. Eight-hundred-and-twenty-two cases met these criteria; 76.4 % were 'non-critical' and 23.6 % were 'critical'. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify features of the clinical presentation associated with critical cases. Five variables were retained in the final multivariable model: combined pain score: (OR 1.19, P < 0.001, 95 % CI 1.09-1.30), heart rate (OR 1.06, P < 0.001, 95 % CI 1.04-1.08), capillary refill time >2.5 s (OR 3.21, P = 0.046, 95 % CI 1.023-10.09), weak pulse character (OR 2.90, P = 0.004, 95 % CI 1.39-5.99) and absence of gut sounds in ≥1 quadrant (OR 3.65, P < 0.001, 95 % CI 2.08-6.41). This is the first study comparing the primary presentation of critical and non-critical cases of abdominal pain. Pain, heart rate, gastrointestinal borborygmi and simple indicators of hypovolaemia were significant indicators of critical cases, even at the primary veterinary examination, and should be considered essential components of the initial assessment and triage of horses presenting with colic.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Peru 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 19%
Student > Master 15 16%
Other 8 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Lecturer 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 27 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 45 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 29 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,437,569
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#33
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,071
of 289,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#2
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 289,750 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.