↓ Skip to main content

A European survey on awareness of post-surgical adhesions among gynaecological surgeons

Overview of attention for article published in Gynecological Surgery, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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 European survey on awareness of post-surgical adhesions among gynaecological surgeons
Published in
Gynecological Surgery, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10397-013-0824-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markus Wallwiener, Philippe Robert Koninckx, Andreas Hackethal, Hans Brölmann, Per Lundorff, Michal Mara, Arnaud Wattiez, Rudy Leon De Wilde

Abstract

The present survey was conducted among gynaecological surgeons from several European countries to assess the actual knowledge and practice related to post-surgical adhesions and measures for reduction. From September 1, 2012 to February 6, 2013, gynaecological surgeons were invited to answer an 18-item online questionnaire accessible through the ESGE website. This questionnaire contained eight questions on care settings and surgical practice and ten questions on adhesion formation and adhesion reduction. Four hundred fourteen surgeons participated; 70.8 % agreed that adhesions are a source of major morbidity. About half of them declared that adhesions represented an important part of their daily medical and surgical work. About two thirds informed their patients about the risk of adhesion. Most cited causes of adhesions were abdominal infections and extensive tissue trauma, and endometriosis and myomectomy surgery. Fewer surgeons expected adhesion formation after laparoscopy (18.9 %) than after laparotomy (40.8 %); 60 % knew the surgical techniques recommended to reduce adhesions; only 44.3 % used adhesion-reduction agents on a regular basis. This survey gives a broad picture of adhesion awareness amongst European gynaecological surgeons, mainly from Germany and the UK. The participants had a good knowledge of factors causing adhesions. Knowledge of surgical techniques recommended and use of anti-adhesion agents developed to reduce adhesions need to be improved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 33%
Unspecified 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 50%
Unspecified 5 28%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 March 2016.
All research outputs
#2,837,105
of 11,923,178 outputs
Outputs from Gynecological Surgery
#9
of 76 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,478
of 191,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gynecological Surgery
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,923,178 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 76 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 191,534 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.