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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Bronchial fistula closure with negative pressure wound therapy: a feasible and cost-effective treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0100-69912016004007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rodrigo Barboza Nunes, Bruno Francisco Müller, Federico Enrique Garcia Cipriano, Pedro Soler Coltro, Jayme Adriano Farina |
| Abstract |
Treatment of bronchial fistula (BF) after pulmonary lobectomy is a challenge. Often, patients require long hospital stay, have recurrent empyema and pneumonia, are susceptible to sepsis, often need broad-spectrum antibiotics, as well as various surgical approaches. With the advent and growing evidence of the benefits of negative pressure therapy (NPT), its use in some patients with BF has been reported with encouraging results concerning its feasibility and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the application of NPT as a resource for BF treatment and comparatively analyze the overall cost of treatment. RESUMO O tratamento de fístula brônquica (FB) após lobectomia pulmonar é um desafio. Muitas vezes, o paciente demanda longo tempo de internação, apresenta recidivas de empiema e pneumonia, pode evoluir para sepse, frequentemente necessita de antibioticoterapia de amplo espectro, bem como de várias abordagens cirúrgicas. Com o advento e acúmulo de evidências dos benefícios da terapia por pressão negativa (TPN), seu uso em alguns pacientes com FB tem sido relatado com resultados animadores relativos à sua viabilidade e ao seu custo-efetividade. O objetivo deste estudo foi demonstrar a aplicação de TPN como recurso para tratamento da FB e analisar comparativamente o custo global do seu tratamento. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 90% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 90% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
#159
of 241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#339,043
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 241 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 381,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.