↓ Skip to main content

A randomized trial of phenylephrine infusion versus bolus dosing for nausea and vomiting during Cesarean delivery in obese women

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 2,878)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
95 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
A randomized trial of phenylephrine infusion versus bolus dosing for nausea and vomiting during Cesarean delivery in obese women
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12630-017-1034-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ronald B. George, Dolores M. McKeen, Jennifer E. Dominguez, Terrence K. Allen, Patricia A. Doyle, Ashraf S. Habib

Abstract

Hypotension is common after spinal anesthesia for Cesarean delivery. It is associated with nausea, vomiting, and fetal acidosis. Previous research on phenylephrine excluded obese subjects. We compared the incidence of intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) in obese patients who received a prophylactic phenylephrine infusion vs those who received bolus dosing for the treatment of spinal-induced hypotension. In this multicentre, double-blinded randomized controlled trial, 160 obese women undergoing elective Cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were randomized to receive a prophylactic phenylephrine infusion initiated at 50 μg·min-1 (and titrated according to a predefined algorithm) or 100 μg phenylephrine boluses to treat hypotension. Maternal systolic blood pressure was maintained within 20% of baseline. The primary study outcome was the incidence of IONV. Intraoperative nausea and vomiting were significantly reduced in the infusion group compared to the bolus group (46% vs 75%, respectively; relative risk [RR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.80; P < 0.001). This was associated with significantly reduced need for intraoperative rescue antiemetics (26% vs 42%, respectively; RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.97; P = 0.04), but no difference in the incidence of vomiting. Postoperative vomiting at two hours was reduced in the infusion group (11% vs 25%; RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.90; P = 0.02);however, there were no differences in the incidence or severity of postoperative nausea, need for rescue antiemetics at two hours and 24 hr, or the incidence of postoperative vomiting at 24 hr. In obese women undergoing Cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia, prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was associated with less intraoperative nausea, less need for rescue antiemetics, and reduced early postoperative vomiting. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01481740). Registered 22 July 2011.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 95 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 5%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 32 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Psychology 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 35 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 18 July 2019.
All research outputs
#736,480
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#49
of 2,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,567
of 445,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#7
of 59 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 445,833 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.