↓ Skip to main content

Acquiring and maintaining point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) competence for anesthesiologists

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
56 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Acquiring and maintaining point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) competence for anesthesiologists
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12630-018-1049-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. Jared McCormick, Elizabeth Clarke Miller, Robert Chen, Viren N. Naik

Abstract

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) involves the bedside use of ultrasound to answer specific diagnostic questions and to assess real-time physiologic responses to treatment. Although POCUS has become a well-established resource for emergency and critical care physicians, anesthesiologists are still working to obtain POCUS skills and to incorporate them into routine practice. This review defines the benefits of POCUS to anesthesia practice, identifies challenges to establishing POCUS in routine anesthesia care, and offers solutions to help guide its incorporation going forward. Benefits to POCUS include improving the sensitivity and specificity of the physical examination and helping to guide patient treatment. The challenges to establishing POCUS as a standard in anesthesia practice include developing and maintaining competence. There is a need to develop standards of practice and a common language between specialties to facilitate training and create guidelines regarding patient management. Presently, our specialty requires consensus by expert stakeholders to address issues of competence, certification, development of standards and terminology, and the management of unexpected diagnoses. To promote POCUS competency in our discipline, we support its incorporation into anesthesiology curricula and training programs and the continuing professional development of POCUS-related activities at a national level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 16%
Student > Postgraduate 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 12%
Researcher 7 6%
Student > Master 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 35 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 35 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,091,868
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#102
of 2,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,280
of 450,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#9
of 45 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 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,879 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 96% 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 450,898 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.