↓ Skip to main content

Optimal propofol induction dose in morbidly obese patients: A randomized controlled trial comparing the bispectral index and lean body weight scalar

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Optimal propofol induction dose in morbidly obese patients: A randomized controlled trial comparing the bispectral index and lean body weight scalar
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12630-017-0852-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yamini Subramani, Waleed Riad, Frances Chung, Jean Wong

Abstract

Propofol dosing based on total body weight (TBW) can lead to overdosing in morbidly obese (MO) patients. Our aim was to determine whether an induction dose of propofol based on a bispectral index (BIS) target is better for achieving loss of consciousness in MO patients than dosing based on lean body weight (LBW). Sixty MO patients with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥ 40 kg·m(-2) were randomized to either BIS- or LBW-based propofol dosing groups. Anesthesia was induced with a propofol infusion of 100 mg·kg(-1)·hr(-1) to an initial target endpoint of a BIS of 50 (BIS group) or until a precalculated dose of 2.6 mg·kg(-1) LBW based on the Janmahasatian equation was administered (LBW group). Induction was assessed using the observer's assessment alertness/sedation scale (OAA/S). If an OAA/S score of 0 was not achieved, infusions continued until it reached 0. The groups were compared for the primary outcome which was the difference in the propofol doses at the initial target endpoint. The median [interquartile range] OAA/S score at the initial target endpoint was lower in the BIS group than in the LBW group (0 [0-0] vs 1 [0-3], respectively; median difference 1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 3; P = 0.001). The number of patients requiring additional propofol doses was also higher for the LBW group [1 vs 18 patients, respectively; relative risk of requiring additional propofol 18; 95% CI 3 to 126; P = 0.001]. The mean (SD) propofol dose at the target endpoint was significantly lower in the LBW group than in the BIS group [164 (36) mg vs 225 (44) mg, respectively; mean difference 61 mg; 95% CI 41 to 83 mg; P = 0.002]. There was no difference between the two groups, however, regarding the total induction dose of propofol needed for the OAA/S to reach 0 (P = 0.07). The induction dose of propofol based on the BIS index was different from the induction dose based on LBW in MO patients. Patients in the LBW group required additional propofol to achieve an OAA/S of 0.

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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 33%
Professor 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 67%
Unknown 2 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 August 2018.
All research outputs
#6,444,944
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#1,000
of 2,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,358
of 325,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#18
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 325,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.