| Title |
Flushing ports of totally implantable venous access devices, and impact of the Huber point needle bevel orientation: experimental tests and numerical computation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/mder.s30029 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gérard Guiffant, Jean Jacques Durussel, Patrice Flaud, Jean Pierre Vigier, Jacques Merckx |
| Abstract |
The use of totally implantable venous access devices developed as a medical device allowing mid- and long-term, frequent, repeated, or continuous injection of therapeutic products, by vascular, cavitary, or perineural access. The effective flushing of these devices is a central element to assure long-lasting use. Our experimental work demonstrates that directing the Huber point needle opening in the diametrically opposite direction of the implantable port exit channel increases the flushing efficiency. These results are consolidated by numerical computations, which support recommendations not only for their maintenance, but also for their use. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 48% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 28% |
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 17 April 2012.
All research outputs
#20,823,121
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#231
of 303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,504
of 173,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 173,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.