↓ Skip to main content
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
bluesky
3 Bluesky users

Readers on

mendeley
7 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.
Article details
Title
Comparing videolaryngoscopy and flexible bronchoscopy to rescue failed direct laryngoscopy in children: a propensity score matched analysis of the Pediatric Difficult Intubation Registry
Published in
Anaesthesia, March 2025
DOI 10.1111/anae.16576
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Flexible bronchoscopy is the gold standard for difficult airway management. Clinicians are using videolaryngoscopy increasingly because it is perceived to be easier to use with high success rates. We conducted this study to compare the success rates of the two techniques when used after failed direct laryngoscopy in children with difficult tracheal intubations. We identified cases where initial attempts at direct laryngoscopy failed in the multicentre Pediatric Difficult Intubation Registry from August 2012-September 2023. After propensity score matching, we compared success rates and complications when videolaryngoscopy and flexible bronchoscopy were used as rescue techniques in the matched cohort and in matched patients weighing < 5 kg. Clinicians chose videolaryngoscopy more frequently than flexible bronchoscopy when direct laryngoscopy failed (64.7%, 1426/2281 vs. 7.3%, 156/2281, p < 0.001). Propensity score matched cohorts did not differ with respect to first-attempt success, eventual success and complications. For the subgroup of infants < 5 kg, clinicians chose videolaryngoscopy more frequently than flexible bronchoscopy to rescue failed direct laryngoscopy (54.3%, 295/543 vs. 8.9%, 44/543, p < 0.001). First-attempt success was 43% (62/145) with videolaryngoscopy and 62% (18/29) with flexible bronchoscopy (odds ratio 2.19, 95%CI 0.96-4.98, p = 0.061). Eventual success was 71% (103/145) with videolaryngoscopy and 90% (26/29) with flexible bronchoscopy (odds ratio 3.53, 95%CI 1.03-12.2, p = 0.046). Complications did not differ between the techniques. Videolaryngoscopy was chosen more frequently than flexible bronchoscopy as a rescue technique in a cohort of children with difficult direct laryngoscopy, with similar success and complication rates. For small infants, flexible bronchoscopy had a higher eventual success rate, underscoring the importance of maintaining proficiency with flexible bronchoscopy.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 29%
Professor 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 43%
Psychology 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 May 2025.
All research outputs
#4,560,767
of 32,311,788 outputs
Outputs from Anaesthesia
#2,215
of 6,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,556
of 346,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anaesthesia
#23
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,311,788 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 346,859 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 62% of its contemporaries.