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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dexmedetomidine Improves Postoperative Patient-Controlled Analgesia following Radical Mastectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2017.00250 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Fan, Hong Xue, Yong Sun, HaiKou Yang, Jun Zhang, Guangming Li, Ying Zheng, Yi Liu |
| Abstract |
Acute postoperative pain following radical mastectomy is a high risk for prolonged convalescence and potential persistent pain in patients with breast cancer. The present study was designed to observe the effect of intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine on acute postoperative pain following radical mastectomy under general anesthesia. Forty-five patients were enrolled into the study and divided into two groups that were maintained with propofol/remifentanil/Ringer's solution or propofol/remifentanil/Dexmedetomidine followed by morphine-based patient-controlled analgesia. During the first 24 h following surgery, patients receiving dexmedetomine had lower NRS pain scores, decreased morphine consumption, longer time to first morphine request as well as a trending decreased incidence of adverse effects when compared to those received Ringer's solution. In conclusion, the present study finds that intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine could promote analgesic property of postoperative morphine. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 31% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 50% |
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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,420,242
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#10,151
of 16,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,473
of 310,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#152
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,248 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 310,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 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.