| Title |
Focused assessment with sonography in trauma: a review of concepts and considerations for anesthesiology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12630-017-1030-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacob Pace, Robert Arntfield |
| Abstract |
The use of point-of-care ultrasound in trauma provides diagnostic clarity and routinely influences management. A scanning protocol known as the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) has been widely adopted by trauma providers of all specialties. The FAST exam addresses a broad array of pathologic conditions capable of causing instability, including hemoperitoneum, hemopericardium, hemothorax, and pneumothorax. The exam is an integral component to the primary assessment of injured patients and an iconic application of point-of-care ultrasound.This review article aims to summarize the application of the FAST exam with special consideration, where relevant, to anesthesiologists. The scope of the FAST exam, technical considerations, and clinical decision-making in trauma are explored. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 7 | 16% |
| United States | 5 | 11% |
| Italy | 3 | 7% |
| Mexico | 2 | 4% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 4% |
| Colombia | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 20 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 67% |
| Scientists | 8 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 16% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 55% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,457,420
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#160
of 2,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,423
of 445,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#13
of 58 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 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 445,848 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.