↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Update on the usage and safety of epinephrine auto-injectors, 2017

Overview of attention for article published in Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 160)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Update on the usage and safety of epinephrine auto-injectors, 2017
Published in
Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety, March 2017
DOI 10.2147/dhps.s121733
Pubmed ID
Authors

Larry S Posner, Carlos A Camargo

Abstract

Anaphylaxis is a serious, potentially fatal allergic reaction. Guidelines recommend prompt intramuscular injections of epinephrine as the first-line therapy for anaphylaxis. Delayed epinephrine treatment may cause undesirable clinical outcomes, including death. In the community, epinephrine auto-injectors (EAIs) are commonly used to treat anaphylaxis. This literature review examines several recent concerns regarding the safety of EAIs that may prevent the timely administration of epinephrine. Reports of cardiovascular complications are linked with epinephrine administration, although recent studies suggest that these events are much more commonly associated with intravenous epinephrine rather than with EAIs. Recent studies have also highlighted accidental injections of EAIs in patients' or caregivers' fingers and lacerations associated with the use of EAI in children. However, the data suggest that both accidental injections and lacerations are rare and require limited medical intervention. In addition, patients may receive conflicting information on the safety and efficacy of using expired EAIs. Overall, it is believed that the benefits of using EAIs far outweigh the potential risks of not administering an EAI. Although legitimate safety concerns are associated with EAIs, adverse events are rare. Continued training of medical providers, caregivers, and patients may be beneficial to address these concerns and reduce EAI-associated injuries while ensuring that patients receive necessary medical care.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 18%
Student > Master 13 16%
Researcher 9 11%
Other 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 19 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 27%
Engineering 10 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 24 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 17 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,768,760
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#10
of 160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,965
of 324,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 324,663 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them