| Title |
Efficacy of dexmedetomidine on postoperative shivering: a meta-analysis of clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12630-015-0368-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhen-Xiu Liu, Feng-Ying Xu, Xiao Liang, Miao Zhou, Liang Wu, Jing-Ru Wu, Jian-Hua Xia, Zui Zou |
| Abstract |
Shivering is a frequent complication in the postoperative period. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of dexmedetomidine on postoperative shivering. Two researchers independently searched PubMed, EMBASE™ and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for controlled clinical trials. The meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager. Thirty-nine trials with 2,478 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Dexmedetomidine reduced postoperative shivering compared with placebo (risk ratio [RR] = 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20 to 0.34), with a minimum effective dose of 0.5 µg·kg(-1) (RR = 0.36; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.60). The anti-shivering effect can be achieved both intravenously and epidurally when administered within two hours prior to the end of surgery. The efficacy of dexmedetomidine was similar to widely used anti-shivering agents, such as fentanyl, meperidine, tramadol, clonidine and so on; however, dexmedetomidine may increase the incidence of sedation, hypotension, bradycardia and dry mouth. The present meta-analysis indicates that dexmedetomidine shows superiority over placebo, but not over other anti-shivering agents. Therefore, considering its high price and potential adverse events, dexmedetomidine may not be appropriate solely for the purpose of the prevention of postoperative shivering. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 2% |
| Professor | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 83% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 85% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 August 2018.
All research outputs
#16,580,596
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#2,256
of 2,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,447
of 279,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#33
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 279,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.