| Title |
Review and recommendations on management of refractory raised intracranial pressure in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Vascular Health and Risk Management, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/vhrm.s34046 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Calvin Hoi Kwan Mak, Yeow Yuen Lu, George Kwok Chu Wong |
| Abstract |
Intracranial hypertension is commonly encountered in poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients. Refractory raised intracranial pressure is associated with poor prognosis. The management of raised intracranial pressure is commonly referenced to experiences in traumatic brain injury. However, pathophysiologically, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is different from traumatic brain injury. Currently, there is a paucity of consensus on the management of refractory raised intracranial pressure in spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage. We discuss in this paper the role of hyperosmolar agents, hypothermia, barbiturates, and decompressive craniectomy in managing raised intracranial pressure refractory to first-line treatment, in which preliminary data supported the use of hypertonic saline and secondary decompressive craniectomy. Future clinical trials should be carried out to delineate better their roles in management of raised intracranial pressure in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ghana | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 128 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 23% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 69 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 33 | 25% |
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 03 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,305,492
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#436
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,465
of 207,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 207,028 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 65% of its contemporaries.