↓ Skip to main content

The sound of air: point-of-care lung ultrasound in perioperative medicine

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 2,914)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
438 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
The sound of air: point-of-care lung ultrasound in perioperative medicine
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12630-018-1062-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Goffi, Richelle Kruisselbrink, Giovanni Volpicelli

Abstract

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as an effective and accurate goal-directed diagnostic tool that can be applied in real time for the bedside assessment of patients with respiratory symptoms and signs. Lung ultrasound has definite and easily recognized findings and has been shown to outperform physical examination and chest radiography for the diagnosis and monitoring of many pulmonary and pleural conditions. In this article, we review the principles of LUS image acquisition and interpretation, summarizing key terms and sonographic findings. Although LUS is easy to learn, adequate training and performance in an organized fashion are crucial to its clinical effectiveness and to prevent harm. Therefore, we review normal LUS findings and propose step-wise approaches to the most common LUS diagnoses, such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, interstitial syndrome, and lung consolidation. We highlight potential pitfalls to avoid and review a recently published practical algorithm for LUS use in clinical practice. Because of the unique physical properties of the lungs, only a careful and systematic analysis of both artifacts and anatomical images allows accurate interpretation of sonographic findings. Future studies exploring the use of software for automatic interpretation, quantitative methods for the assessment of interstitial syndrome, and continuous monitoring devices may further simplify and expand the use of this technique at the bedside in acute medicine and the perioperative setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 438 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 16%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Student > Master 8 7%
Other 27 24%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 71 64%
Engineering 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Energy 1 <1%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 31 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 266. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#141,257
of 26,033,965 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#6
of 2,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,335
of 450,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#1
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,033,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 450,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.