↓ Skip to main content

Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research Network position paper on the role of hypotensive resuscitation as part of remote damage control resuscitation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research Network position paper on the role of hypotensive resuscitation as part of remote damage control resuscitation
Published in
Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The, June 2018
DOI 10.1097/ta.0000000000001856
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Woolley, Patrick Thompson, Emrys Kirkman, Richard Reed, Sylvain Ausset, Andrew Beckett, Christopher Bjerkvig, Andrew P Cap, Tim Coats, Mitchell Cohen, Marc Despasquale, Warren Dorlac, Heidi Doughty, Richard Dutton, Brian Eastridge, Elon Glassberg, Anthony Hudson, Donald Jenkins, Sean Keenan, Christophe Martinaud, Ethan Miles, Ernest Moore, Giles Nordmann, Nicolas Prat, Joseph Rappold, Michael C Reade, Paul Rees, Rory Rickard, Martin Schreiber, Stacy Shackelford, Håkon Skogran Eliassen, Jason Smith, Mike Smith, Philip Spinella, Geir Strandenes, Kevin Ward, Sarah Watts, Nathan White, Steve Williams

Abstract

The Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network has developed a consensus statement on the role of permissive hypotension in remote damage control resuscitation (RDCR). A summary of the evidence on permissive hypotension follows the THOR Network position on the topic. In RDCR, the burden of time in the care of the patients suffering from noncompressible hemorrhage affects outcomes. Despite the lack of published evidence, and based on clinical experience and expertise, it is the THOR Network's opinion that the increase in prehospital time leads to an increased burden of shock, which poses a greater risk to the patient than the risk of rebleeding due to slightly increased blood pressure, especially when blood products are available as part of prehospital resuscitation.The THOR Network's consensus statement is, "In a casualty with life-threatening hemorrhage, shock should be reversed as soon as possible using a blood-based HR fluid. Whole blood is preferred to blood components. As a part of this HR, the initial systolic blood pressure target should be 100 mm Hg. In RDCR, it is vital for higher echelon care providers to receive a casualty with sufficient physiologic reserve to survive definitive surgical hemostasis and aggressive resuscitation. The combined use of blood-based resuscitation and limiting systolic blood pressure is believed to be effective in promoting hemostasis and reversing shock".

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 12 13%
Other 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 32 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 36 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 23 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,085,811
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The
#784
of 7,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,774
of 342,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The
#30
of 100 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 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 342,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.