↓ Skip to main content

Modifiable and Nonmodifiable Factors Associated With Perioperative Failure of Extraglottic Airway Devices

Overview of attention for article published in Anesthesia and analgesia, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Modifiable and Nonmodifiable Factors Associated With Perioperative Failure of Extraglottic Airway Devices
Published in
Anesthesia and analgesia, June 2018
DOI 10.1213/ane.0000000000002659
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Extraglottic airway device (EGA) failure can be associated with severe complications and adverse patient outcomes. Prior research has identified patient- and procedure-related predictors of EGA failure. In this retrospective study, we assessed the incidence of perioperative EGA failure at our institution and identified modifiable factors associated with this complication that may be the target of preventative or mitigating interventions. We performed a 5-year retrospective analysis of adult general anesthesia cases managed with EGAs in a single academic center. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify clinically modifiable and nonmodifiable factors significantly associated with 3 different types of perioperative EGA failure: (1) "EGA placement failure," (2) "EGA failure before procedure start," and (3) "EGA failure after procedure start." A total of 19,693 cases involving an EGA were included in the analysis dataset. EGA failure occurred in 383 (1.9%) of the cases. EGA placement failure occurred in 222 (1.13%) of the cases. EGA failure before procedure start occurred in 76 (0.39%) of the cases. EGA failure after procedure start occurred in 85 (0.43%) of the cases. Factors significantly associated with each type of failure and controllable by the anesthesia team were as follows: (1) EGA placement failure: use of desflurane (odds ratio [OR], 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.25) and EGA size 4 or 5 vs 2 or 3 (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.05-0.10); (2) EGA failure before procedure start: use of desflurane (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.23-3.40) and 3 or more placement attempts (OR, 4.69; 95% CI, 2.57-8.56); and (3) EGA failure after procedure start: 3 or more placement attempts (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.02-4.16) and increasing anesthesia time (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.17-1.55). The overall incidence of EGA failure was 1.9%, and EGA placement failure was the most common type of failure. We also found that use of desflurane and use of smaller EGA sizes in adult patients were factors under the direct control of anesthesia clinicians associated with EGA failure. An increasing number of attempts at EGA placement was associated with later device failures. Our findings also confirm the association of EGA failure with previously identified patient- and procedure-related factors such as increased body mass index, male sex, and position other than supine.

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 3 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 22 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 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 14%
Lecturer 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 9 41%
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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#24,235,216
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from Anesthesia and analgesia
#8,789
of 11,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,421
of 374,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anesthesia and analgesia
#95
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 374,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.