↓ Skip to main content

Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers

Overview of attention for article published in Patient Safety in Surgery, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
Published in
Patient Safety in Surgery, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13037-016-0097-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. C. J. Sim, D. Angadi, G. E. Jarvis, M. Porteous

Abstract

Marking the surgical site is a well-established part of pre-operative protocol and errors in marking have been implicated in wrong site surgery incidents and are a significant patient safety issue. There are many commercially available marker pens and anecdotally very little consistency in which pen is used or the clarity of marking. Previous studies have shown subjective differences between different pens and the current paper sought to support this evidence with objective data and widen the investigation of commercially available pens. Eight marker pens were used to mark two separate sites on three caucasian volunteers. These marks were photographed and assessed by six observers before and after the application of chlorhexidine skin preparation. The observers were blinded to which pen was used for each mark, and rated the clarity of the marks subjectively. The photographs were assessed using image analysis software to give an objective measure of clarity against the skin. There was a wide variation between the clarity of marks made by the different pens, and also a wide variation in the resistance to skin preparation. The Pentel N50 pen was the outstanding best performing pen across all categories. It is recommended that the Pentel N50 black marker pen be used for surgical site marking to improve patient safety and avoid adverse events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 24%
Student > Postgraduate 3 18%
Student > Master 2 12%
Librarian 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 18%
Arts and Humanities 2 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 12%
Psychology 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,795,140
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Patient Safety in Surgery
#176
of 230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,715
of 300,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient Safety in Surgery
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 300,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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