| Title |
Effectiveness of intramuscular neostigmine to accelerate bladder emptying after spinal anesthesia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s176281 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tjokorda Gde Agung Senapathi, Made Wiryana, I Made Subagiartha, I Putu Pramana Suarjaya, I Made Gede Widnyana, Ida Bagus Krisna Jaya Sutawan, A A Gde Putra Semara Jaya, Andri Thewidya |
| Abstract |
Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is one of the most common complications following spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia may influence urinary bladder function due to interruption of the micturition reflex. Urinary catheterization is the standard treatment of POUR. Urinary catheter insertion is an invasive procedure, which is associated with catheter-related infections, urethral trauma, and patient discomfort. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) neostigmine to accelerate bladder emptying after spinal anesthesia. A total of 36 patients undergoing lower abdominal (except for pelvic, urologic, anorectal, and hernia surgery) and lower extremity surgery under spinal anesthesia were divided into two groups randomly (n=18), to either neostigmine (N) group or control (C) group. Neostigmine 0.5 mg (N group) or NaCl 0.9% (C group) was administered intramuscularly when Bromage score 0 and sensory level sacral two have been achieved. The time to first voiding after IM injection and the time to first voiding after spinal anesthesia were measured. The time to first voiding after IM injection was significantly faster (P≤0.05) in the N group than that in the C group, with median time as 40 minutes (20-70 minutes) and 75 minutes (55-135 minutes), respectively. Time to first voiding after spinal anesthesia was also significantly faster (P≤0.05) in the N group than that in the C group (mean of 280.8±66.6 minutes and 364.2±77.3 minutes, respectively). IM neostigmine effectively accelerates bladder emptying after spinal anesthesia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Librarian | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 60% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
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 29 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#752
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,076
of 345,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#19
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 345,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.