| Title |
A retrospective comparative provider workload analysis for femoral nerve and adductor canal catheters following knee arthroplasty
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Anesthesia, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00540-014-1910-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Rasmussen, Eugenia Kim, T. Edward Kim, Steven K. Howard, Seshadri Mudumbai, Nicholas J. Giori, Steven Woolson, Toni Ganaway, Edward R. Mariano |
| Abstract |
Adductor canal catheters preserve quadriceps strength better than femoral nerve catheters and may facilitate postoperative ambulation following total knee arthroplasty. However, the effect of this newer technique on provider workload, if any, is unknown. We conducted a retrospective provider workload analysis comparing these two catheter techniques; all other aspects of the clinical pathway remained the same. The primary outcome was number of interventions recorded per patient postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included infusion duration, ambulation distance, opioid consumption, and hospital length of stay. Adductor canal patients required a median (10-90th percentiles) of 0.0 (0.0-2.6) interventions compared to 1.0 (0.3-3.0) interventions for femoral patients (p < 0.001); 18/23 adductor canal patients (78 %) compared to 2/22 femoral patients (9 %) required no interventions (p < 0.001). Adductor canal catheter infusions lasted 2.0 (1.4-2.0) days compared to 1.5 (1.0-2.7) days in the femoral group (p = 0.016). Adductor canal patients ambulated further [mean (SD)] than femoral patients on postoperative day 1 [24.5 (21.7) vs. 11.9 (14.6) meters, respectively; p = 0.030] and day 2 [44.9 (26.3) vs. 22.0 (22.2) meters, respectively; p = 0.003]. Postoperative opioid consumption and length of stay were similar between groups. We conclude that adductor canal catheters offer both patient and provider benefits when compared to femoral nerve catheters. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 21% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 58% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
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 22 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,379,018
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#568
of 810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,261
of 245,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 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 810 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 245,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.