| Title |
Anesthesia Provision in Disasters and Armed Conflicts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Anesthesiology Reports, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40140-017-0190-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miguel Trelles Centurion, Rafael Van Den Bergh, Henry Gray |
| Abstract |
Disasters and armed conflicts are characterized by high numbers of trauma cases, and occur mainly in developing countries where the healthcare response is already impaired, resulting in an inadequate response. Aside of the trauma cases, other surgical health conditions are also still present and require urgent care. Surgical care needs are different from context to context and depend on local means and capabilities. Doctors without Borders (MSF) has proven that even in precarious situations, safe administration of anesthesia is possible, and the "do no harm" principle can and must be upheld. Anesthesia providers need to recognize the difficulties linked to these contexts. Local, spinal and general intravenous (mainly with Ketamine) anesthetics seem to be the most widely accepted. Inhalation anesthesia has constraints; regional is underused and epidural is not recommended. Standard operative procedures should be in place, and an informed consent from the patient must be granted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 9% |
| United States | 2 | 9% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Denmark | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 59% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 27% |
| Scientists | 3 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,599,817
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Current Anesthesiology Reports
#15
of 208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,683
of 319,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Anesthesiology Reports
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 319,461 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them