↓ Skip to main content

Ketodex, a combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in children: a preliminary report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Anesthesia, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Ketodex, a combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in children: a preliminary report
Published in
Journal of Anesthesia, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00540-012-1538-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rakhee Goyal, Shivinder Singh, R. N. Shukla, Arun Kumar Patra, D. V. Bhargava

Abstract

A combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine for upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (UGIE) was studied in 46 children aged 2-12 years over a 6-month period. Dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg and ketamine 2 mg/kg were given as a bolus over 5 min. Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and sedation scores were noted before induction as baseline and then every 5 min until recovery. The duration and ease of the procedure, time to recovery, and adverse effects, if any, were also recorded. UGIE could be performed with ease in 41 of the 46 cases. The HR, MAP, and SpO2 did not change significantly from the baseline. No airway intervention was required in any patient. There was no laryngospasm or shivering in any of the children, and one, four, and 11 children had hiccup, vomiting, and increased salivation, respectively. The Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium score was <4 in all except for two cases. The results of this case series show that this drug combination not only promises to be clinically effective but also safe for UGIE in children. Further randomized controlled trials with standard sedation protocols will be required to draw definite conclusions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Professor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Other 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 60%
Unspecified 4 13%
Psychology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 February 2014.
All research outputs
#6,160,636
of 12,221,136 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#111
of 538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,417
of 280,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#3
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,221,136 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 538 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 280,800 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.