↓ Skip to main content

Increasing Regional Anesthesia Use in a Serbian Teaching Hospital through an International Collaboration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Increasing Regional Anesthesia Use in a Serbian Teaching Hospital through an International Collaboration
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00134
Pubmed ID
Authors

Curtis L. Baysinger, Borislava Pujic, Ivan Velickovic, Medge D. Owen, Joanna Serafin, Matthew S. Shotwell, Ferne Braveman

Abstract

Many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) report low rates of regional anesthesia (RA) use for cesarean delivery (CD), despite its association with lower maternal major morbidity and mortality. Also, the prevalence of neuraxial analgesia for labor (NAL) is often low in LMICs. We report on the results of a collaboration in clinical education over a multi-year period between Kybele Inc., an international non-profit organization, and Klinicki Centar Vojvodine (CCV), a teaching hospital in Novi Sad, Serbia, to increase RA use for CD and NAL at CCV. From late 2011 through 2015, teams from Kybele participated in annual to biannual didactic conferences and week-long bedside teaching efforts involving obstetric and anesthesia staff from CCV and surrounding hospitals. Ongoing contact occurred at least weekly between Kybele and the host to discuss progress. De-identified quality improvement data on total deliveries, numbers of elective and non-elective CDs, number of vaginal deliveries, type of anesthesia for CD, and the number of NALs were collected. RA use for CD increased to 25% in year 2015 versus 14% in base year 2011 [odds ratio (OR): 2.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.73,2.42; p < 0.001]. NAL increased to 10.5% of laboring women in 2015 versus 1.2% in 2011 (OR: 9.6; 95% CI: 7.2, 12.8; p < 0.001). Greater increases for RA use during non-elective CD were observed between 2011 and 2015 (1.4 versus 7.5% of total CD; OR: 5.52; 95% CI: 2.63, 8.41; p < 0.001) relative to elective CD (12.5 versus 17.5% of total CD; OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.23, 1.77; p < 0.001). Overall, RA for CD increased during the 4 year collaboration but was not as great as reported in other countries with similar health-care demographics utilizing a similar program. Detailed descriptions of program interventions and barriers to change at CCV are presented.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 15%
Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
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 09 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,554,389
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,827
of 10,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,796
of 317,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#64
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 317,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.