↓ Skip to main content

Surgeon‐Performed Ultrasound in Diagnosing Acute Cholecystitis and Appendicitis

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, 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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Surgeon‐Performed Ultrasound in Diagnosing Acute Cholecystitis and Appendicitis
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00268-018-4673-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camilla Gustafsson, Anna Lindelius, Staffan Törngren, Hans Järnbert-Pettersson, Anders Sondén

Abstract

The use of ultrasound (US) outside the radiology department has increased the last decades, but large studies assessing the quality of bedside US are still lacking. This study evaluates surgeon-performed US (SPUS) and radiologist-performed US (RPUS) with respect to biliary disease and appendicitis. Between October 2011 and November 2012, 300 adult patients, with a referral for an abdominal US, were prospectively enrolled in the study and examined by a radiologist as well as a surgeon. The surgeons had undergone a 4-week-long US education. US findings of the surgeon and of the radiologist were compared to final diagnosis, set by an independent external observer going through each patient's chart. Among 183 patients with suspected biliary disease, 74 had gallstones and 21 had acute cholecystitis. SPUS and RPUS diagnosed gallstones with a sensitivity of 87.1 versus 97.3%. Specificity was 96.0 versus 98.9%, and the accuracy 92.3 versus 98.2%. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for acute cholecystitis by SPUS and RPUS were: 60.0 versus 80.0%, 98.6 versus 97.8% and 93.9 versus 95.6%, respectively. Among 58 patients with suspected appendicitis, 15 had the disease. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for appendicitis by SPUS and RPUS were: 53.3 versus 73.3%, 89.7 versus 93.3% and 77.3 versus 86.7%, respectively. SPUS is reliable in diagnosing gallstones. Diagnosing cholecystitis and appendicitis with US is more challenging for both surgeons and radiologists. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov. Registration number: NCT02469935.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 24%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Other 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Researcher 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 13 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Unknown 18 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 08 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,665,305
of 24,615,420 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#352
of 4,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,018
of 334,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#9
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,615,420 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 334,477 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.