↓ Skip to main content

Individualizing propofol dosage: a multivariate linear model approach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Individualizing propofol dosage: a multivariate linear model approach
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10877-013-9510-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Conceição Rocha, Teresa Mendonça, Maria Eduarda Silva

Abstract

In the last decades propofol became established as an intravenous agent for the induction and maintenance of both sedation and general anesthesia procedures. In order to achieve the desired clinical effects appropriate infusion rate strategies must be designed. Moreover, it is important to avoid or minimize associated side effects namely adverse cardiorespiratory effects and delayed recovery. Nowadays, to attain these purposes the continuous propofol delivery is usually performed through target-controlled infusion (TCI) systems whose algorithms rely on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models. This work presents statistical models to estimate both the infusion rate and the bolus administration. The modeling strategy relies on multivariate linear models, based on patient characteristics such as age, height, weight and gender along with the desired target concentration. A clinical database collected with a RugLoopII device on 84 patients undergoing ultrasonographic endoscopy under sedation-analgesia with propofol and remifentanil is used to estimate the models (training set with 74 cases) and assess their performance (test set with 10 cases). The results obtained in the test set comprising a broad range of characteristics are satisfactory since the models are able to predict bolus, infusion rates and the effect-site concentrations comparable to those of TCI. Furthermore, comparisons of the effect-site concentrations for dosages predicted by the proposed Linear model and the Marsh model for the same target concentration is achieved using Schnider model and a factorial design on the factors (patients characteristics). The results indicate that the Linear model predicts a dosage profile that is faster in leading to an effect-site concentration closer to the desired target concentration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 8 30%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 33%
Mathematics 3 11%
Computer Science 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 September 2013.
All research outputs
#18,348,542
of 22,723,682 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#492
of 664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,059
of 204,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,723,682 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 204,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.