↓ Skip to main content

Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
148 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
256 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
Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review
Published in
Critical Care, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1277-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Petitpas, J. Guenezan, T. Vendeuvre, M. Scepi, D. Oriot, O. Mimoz

Abstract

Indications for intra-osseous (IO) infusion are increasing in adults requiring administration of fluids and medications during initial resuscitation. However, this route is rarely used nowadays due to a lack of knowlegde and training. We reviewed the current evidence for its use in adults requiring resuscitative procedures, the contraindications of the technique, and modalities for catheter implementation and skill acquisition. A PubMed search for all articles published up to December 2015 was performed by using the terms "Intra-osseous" AND "Adult". Additional articles were included by using the "related citations" feature of PubMed or checking references of selected articles. Editorials, comments and case reports were excluded. Abstracts of all the articles that the search yielded were independently screened for eligibility by two authors and included in the analysis after mutual consensus. In total, 84 full-text articles were reviewed and 49 of these were useful for answering the following question "when, how, and for which population should an IO infusion be used in adults" were selected to prepare independent drafts. Once this step had been completed, all authors met, reviewed the drafts together, resolved disagreements by consensus with all the authors, and decided on the final version. IO infusion should be implemented in all critical situations when peripheral venous access is not easily obtainable. Contraindications are few and complications are uncommon, most of the time bound to prolonged use. The IO infusion allows for blood sampling and administration of virtually all types of fluids and medications including vasopressors, with a bioavailability close to the intravenous route. Unfortunately, IO infusion remains underused in adults even though learning the technique is rapid and easy. Indications for IO infusion use in adults requiring urgent parenteral access and having difficult intravenous access are increasing. Physicians working in emergency departments or intensive care units should learn the procedures for catheter insertion and maintenance, the contraindications of the technique, and the possibilities this access offers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 148 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 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 254 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 13%
Other 29 11%
Student > Master 28 11%
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 49 19%
Unknown 72 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 68 27%
Engineering 5 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Materials Science 3 1%
Other 13 5%
Unknown 81 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 109. 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 27 December 2023.
All research outputs
#390,662
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#208
of 6,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,121
of 315,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#4
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. 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 315,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 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 97% of its contemporaries.