↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the i-gel™ and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ in terms of clinical performance

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English edition), September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Comparison of the i-gel™ and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ in terms of clinical performance
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English edition), September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.02.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reyhan Polat, Gözde Bumin Aydin, Jülide Ergil, Murat Sayin, Tuğba Kokulu, İbrahim Öztürk

Abstract

The i-gel™ is one of the second generation supraglottic airway devices. Our study was designed to compare the i-gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ with respect to the clinical performance. We compared the performance of the i-gel with that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in 120 patients undergoing urologic surgery during general anesthesia without muscle relaxant with respect to the number of attempts for successful insertion, insertion time, peak airway pressure, incidence of regurgitation, fiberoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. Second generation supraglottic airway devices were inserted by the same anesthesiologist, experienced in use of both devices (>200 uses and first time failure rate <5%). Methylene blue method was used to detect gastric regurgitation. There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the success of insertion of second generation supraglottic airway device (p=0.951). The laryngeal mask insertion time for the i-gel group was significantly shorter than that for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (11.6±2.4s versus 13.1±1.8s [p=0.001]). The fiberoptic glottic view scores for the i-gel group was significantly better than that for the ones for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (p=0.001). On fiberoptic view, there was no sign of methylene blue dye at any time point in either group. In addition, there was no difference between the groups in patient response regarding the presence of a sore throat when questioned 24h after the procedure (p=0.752). Both devices had good performance with low postoperative complications and without occurrence of regurgitation. The i-gel provided a shorter insertion time and a better fiberoptic view than the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic.

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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Other 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 12 30%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 5 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,528,275
of 12,045,098 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English edition)
#27
of 92 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,188
of 239,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English edition)
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,045,098 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 92 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 239,090 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them