↓ Skip to main content

Prehospital administration of tranexamic acid in trauma patients

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
274 tweeters
facebook
16 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
200 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
Prehospital administration of tranexamic acid in trauma patients
Published in
Critical Care, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1322-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arasch Wafaisade, Rolf Lefering, Bertil Bouillon, Andreas B. Böhmer, Michael Gäßler, Matthias Ruppert

Abstract

Evidence on prehospital administration of the antifibrinolytic tranexamic acid (TXA) in civilian trauma populations is scarce. The aim was to study whether prehospital TXA use in trauma patients was associated with improved outcomes. The prehospital database of the ADAC (General German Automobile Club) Air Rescue Service was linked with the TraumaRegister of the German Trauma Society to reidentify patients documented in both registries. Primarily admitted trauma patients (2012 until 2014) who were treated with TXA during the prehospital phase were matched with patients who had not received prehospital TXA, applying propensity score-based matching. The matching yielded two identical cohorts (n = 258 in each group), since there were no significant differences in demographics or injury characteristics (mean Injury Severity Score 24 ± 14 [TXA] vs. 24 ± 16 [control]; p = 0.46). The majority had sustained blunt injury (90.3 % vs. 93.0 %; p = 0.34). There were no differences with respect to prehospital therapy, including rates of intubation, chest tube insertion or both administration of i.v. fluids and catecholamines. During ER treatment, the TXA cohort received fewer numbers of red blood cells and plasma units, but without reaching statistical significance. Incidences of organ failure, sepsis or thromboembolism showed no significant differences as well, although data were incomplete for these parameters. Early mortality was significantly lower in the TXA group (e.g., 24-h mortality 5.8 % [TXA] vs. 12.4 % [control]; p = 0.01), and mean time to death was 8.8 ± 13.4 days vs. 3.6 ± 4.9 days, respectively (p = 0.001). Overall hospital mortality was similar in both groups (14.7 % vs. 16.3 %; p = 0.72). The most pronounced mortality difference was observed in patients with a high propensity score, reflecting severe injury load. This is the first civilian study, to our knowledge, in which the effect of prehospital TXA use in trauma patients has been examined. TXA was associated with prolonged time to death and significantly improved early survival. Until further evidence emerges, the results of this study support the use of TXA during prehospital treatment of severely injured patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 274 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 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 199 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 21%
Student > Master 30 15%
Researcher 18 9%
Other 14 7%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 43 22%
Unknown 40 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 108 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Unspecified 4 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 44 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 191. 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 05 March 2021.
All research outputs
#150,516
of 21,321,698 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#67
of 5,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,319
of 280,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#1
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,321,698 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 280,490 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 99% of its contemporaries.