↓ Skip to main content

The use of clamped drainage to reduce blood loss in total hip arthroplasty

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
The use of clamped drainage to reduce blood loss in total hip arthroplasty
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13018-015-0259-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jian-gang Cao, Lei Wang, Jun Liu

Abstract

Drainage is a routine practice used to reduce hematoma and blood loss following total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of clamped drainage on blood loss and wound healing after total hip arthroplasty. A prospective cohort of 44 patients with hip osteoarthritis or femur head necrosis undergoing total hip arthroplasty was randomized equally into two groups: 6-h postoperative clamped or non-clamped suction tube drainage. Body mass index, gender distribution, preoperative hemoglobin, hip pathology, and affected side were comparable between the two groups. Blood loss, hemoglobin levels, and wound healing complications were recorded and compared between groups. The drainage blood loss and calculated blood loss volumes were higher for the non-clamped group. About 100 mL more blood loss was noticed in the non-clamped group. There was no significant difference in adverse events or need for transfusion. The present study showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative drainage amount between clamped and unclamped drainage groups, but this difference was not large enough to warrant increased blood transfusion requirements in patients with unclamped drainage. Further studies are essential to define the critical period of clamping that is compatible with the dual objectives of reduced blood loss and lack of wound complications from hematoma.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 2 4%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 19 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 20 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,156,937
of 23,312,088 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#613
of 1,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,558
of 268,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#11
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,312,088 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 268,581 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 56% of its contemporaries.