↓ Skip to main content

The diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome: a review

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
The diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome: a review
Published in
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, June 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00068-014-0414-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. M. McQueen, A. D. Duckworth

Abstract

Delay in the diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome (ACS) has serious and sometimes catastrophic consequences for the outcome of injury, and has been recognised as one of the primary causes of a poor outcome. This article reviews the evidence for the use of clinical findings and intra-compartmental pressure (ICP) monitoring in making a prompt diagnosis of ACS. Clinical findings have poor sensitivities (13-64 %) compared to ICP monitoring (94 %) using a differential pressure threshold of less than 30 mmHg for more than 2 h. The specificities of clinical findings range from 63 to 98 % compared to a value of 98 % for ICP monitoring. Patients at risk of ACS or at risk of a delayed diagnosis are defined, and it is recommended that these patients undergo ICP monitoring. It is recommended that decompression is carried out primarily on the basis of the differential pressure being less than 30 mmHg for more than 2 h as this results in a reduced time to definitive treatment when compared to waiting for the development of clinical symptoms and signs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Denmark 1 6%
Unknown 15 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 18%
Other 3 18%
Student > Master 3 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 59%
Engineering 3 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Unspecified 2 12%

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 19 October 2014.
All research outputs
#8,370,497
of 13,358,614 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery
#152
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,250
of 232,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery
#8
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,358,614 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 232,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.