↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A prospective, double-blinded, randomized comparison of ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block with lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block versus standard anesthetic management for pain control during…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
A prospective, double-blinded, randomized comparison of ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block with lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block versus standard anesthetic management for pain control during and after traumatic femur fracture repair in the pediatric population
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, September 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s139106
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole M Elsey, Joseph D Tobias, Kevin E Klingele, Ralph J Beltran, Tarun Bhalla, David Martin, Giorgio Veneziano, Julie Rice, Dmitry Tumin

Abstract

Traumatic injury of the femur resulting in femoral fracture may result in significant postoperative pain. As with other causes of acute pain, regional anesthesia may offer a benefit over conventional therapy with intravenous opioids. This study prospectively assesses the effects of femoral nerve blockade with a lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (FN-LFCN) on intraoperative anesthetic requirements, postoperative pain scores, and opioid requirements. Seventeen pediatric patients (age 2-18 years) undergoing surgical repair of a traumatic femur fracture fulfilled the study criteria and were randomly assigned to general anesthesia with either an FN-LFCN block (n = 10) or intravenous opioids (n = 7). All patients received a general anesthetic with isoflurane for maintenance anesthesia during the surgical repair of the femur fracture. Patients randomized to the FN-LFCN block group received ultrasound-guided nerve blockade using ropivacaine (0.2%/0.5% based on patient weight). At the conclusion of surgery, the airway device was removed once tracheal extubation criteria were achieved, and patients were transported to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) for recovery and assessment of pain by a blinded study nurse. The final study cohort included 17 patients (n = 10 for FN-LFCN block group; n = 7 for the intravenous opioid group). Although the median of the maximum postoperative pain scores in the regional group was 0, this did not reach statistical significance when compared to the median pain score of 3 in the intravenous opioid group. Likewise, no difference between the two groups was noted when comparing intraoperative anesthetic requirements, opioid requirements (intraoperative, in the post-anesthesia recovery room, and in the inpatient ward), and the time to first opioid requirement postoperatively in the inpatient ward. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study failed to demonstrate a clear benefit of regional anesthesia over intravenous opioids intraoperatively and postoperatively during repair of femoral shaft fractures in the pediatric population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Other 6 11%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 23 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 26 48%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 September 2017.
All research outputs
#12,858,916
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#824
of 1,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,452
of 316,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#26
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,758 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 316,305 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.