↓ Skip to main content

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in neurosurgical trauma patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Surgical Research, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in neurosurgical trauma patients
Published in
Journal of Surgical Research, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.049
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brett M. Tracy, James R. Dunne, Cindy Marie O'Neal, Eric Clayton

Abstract

Venous thromboembolisms (VTEs) occur more frequently in patients with traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) and spinal cord injuries, yet the use of chemoprophylaxis is controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the timing of chemical VTE prophylaxis initiation and the development of VTE events in these patients. Prospective data were collected and retrospectively reviewed on 1425 patients sustaining TBIs or spinal injuries from 2010 to 2014. Patients were reviewed with respect to age, gender, injury severity score, Glasgow coma score, and mechanism of injury as well as timing of initiation of chemical VTE prophylaxis and presence or absence of VTE. Patients who developed a VTE had a significantly longer time to initiation of chemical VTE prophylaxis (6.7 ± 4.9 d versus 4.7 ± 4.9 d, P < 0.001) compared with those that did not develop a VTE. Also, for each 1 d increase in time to prophylaxis initiation, the odds of developing a VTE increased significantly (odds ratio = 1.055, P < 0.001). The combination subarachnoid hemorrhage/subdural hemorrhage group was started on VTE prophylaxis significantly later (8.3 ± 6.1 d versus 6.7 ± 3.9 d, P < 0.01) than the overall TBI group and had a higher incidence of VTE (14.4 versus 10.4%, P = NS). In contrast, patients sustaining isolated spinal injuries received chemical VTE prophylaxis significantly earlier (3.4 ± 4.2 d versus 6.7 ± 3.9 d, P < 0.001) and had a significant decrease in their VTE rate (4.4 versus 10.4%, P < 0.0001) compared with the overall TBI group. Patients with VTEs had a significant delay in time to initiation of chemoprophylaxis compared with patients without VTEs. Patients sustaining a TBI had a 2-fold delay in initiation of chemoprophylaxis and an associated 2-fold increase in VTE events compared with patients who sustained spinal injuries. Of those patients who developed a TBI, patients who sustained a combination subarachnoid hemorrhage and/or subdural hemorrhage had a significant delay in initiation of chemoprophylaxis with a higher rate of VTE events.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Other 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 61%
Neuroscience 3 13%
Unknown 6 26%

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 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,011,240
of 12,196,802 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Research
#1,878
of 3,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,149
of 271,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Research
#55
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,196,802 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,422 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. 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 271,485 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 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 69% of its contemporaries.