↓ Skip to main content
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 (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
161 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
Comparison of efficacy and safety of lateral-to-medial continuous transversus abdominis plane block with thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery
Published in
European Journal of Anaesthesiology, November 2015
DOI 10.1097/eja.0000000000000345
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We recently described a lateral-to-medial approach for transversus abdominis plane (LM-TAP) block, which may permit preoperative initiation of the block. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of continuous LM-TAP blocks in clinical practice in comparison with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). A randomised, open-label study. University Hospital, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada from July 2008 to August 2012. Fifty adult patients undergoing open abdominal surgery via laparotomy were allocated randomly to receive preoperative catheter-congruent TEA or ultrasound-guided continuous bilateral LM-TAP block for 72 h postoperatively. Reasons for noninclusion were American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status more than 4, known allergy to study drugs, chronic pain/opioid dependence, spinal abnormalities or psychiatric illness. In the TEA group (n = 24), patient-controlled epidural analgesia was maintained using bupivacaine 0.1% with hydromorphone 10 μg ml after establishment of the initial block. In the LM-TAP group (n = 26), ultrasound-guided LM-TAP catheters were inserted on each side preoperatively after a bolus of 30 ml of ropivacaine 0.5% (20 ml subcostal and 10 ml subumbilical injections on both sides). Analgesia was maintained with an infusion of ropivacaine 0.35% at a rate of 2 to 2.5 ml h through each catheter, along with rescue intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. The primary outcome was pain score on coughing 24 h after the end of surgery. Secondary outcomes were pain scores from 24 to 72 h, intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption, time to onset of bowel movement and side effect profiles. Mean [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] pain scores at rest ranged from 1. 7 (0.9 to 2.5) to 2.3 (1.1 to 3.4) in TEA vs. 1.5 (0.7 to 2.2) to 2.2 (1.3 to 3.0) in LM-TAP (P = 0.829). The dynamic pain scores ranged from 2.9 (1.5 to 4.4) to 3.8 (2.8 to 4.8) in TEA vs. 3.3 (2.4 to 4.3) to 3.8 (2.7 to 4.9) in LM-TAP (P = 0.551). The variability in pain scores was lower in the LM-TAP group than in the TEA group in the first 24 h postoperatively. Patient satisfaction and other secondary outcomes were similar. Continuous bilateral LM-TAP block can be initiated preoperatively and may provide comparable analgesia to TEA in patients undergoing laparotomy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: not registered because registration was not mandatory at the time of starting the trial.

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 4 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 161 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 %
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 159 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Student > Postgraduate 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Student > Master 13 8%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 58 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 10%
Psychology 4 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 65 40%
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 29 October 2015.
All research outputs
#16,932,658
of 27,780,120 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Anaesthesiology
#1,179
of 2,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,109
of 297,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Anaesthesiology
#16
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,780,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 297,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 52% of its contemporaries.