↓ Skip to main content

Efficiency and safety of inhalative sedation with sevoflurane in comparison to an intravenous sedation concept with propofol in intensive care patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Efficiency and safety of inhalative sedation with sevoflurane in comparison to an intravenous sedation concept with propofol in intensive care patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-13-135
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Soukup, Antje Selle, Andreas Wienke, Jörg Steighardt, Nana-Maria Wagner, Patrick Kellner

Abstract

State of the art sedation concepts on intensive care units (ICU) favor propofol for a time period of up to 72 h and midazolam for long-term sedation. However, intravenous sedation is associated with complications such as development of tolerance, insufficient sedation quality, gastrointestinal paralysis, and withdrawal symptoms including cognitive deficits. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether sevoflurane as a volatile anesthetic technically implemented by the anesthetic-conserving device (ACD) may provide advantages regarding 'weaning time', efficiency, and patient's safety when compared to standard intravenous sedation employing propofol.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 14 17%
Other 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 19 23%
Unknown 14 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 16 19%