Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24482056›Full record

ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2014

[Point-of-care diagnostics compared to standard coagulation tests in multiple trauma. Pros and cons].

K Johanning

Abstract readComparative StudyEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

K JohanningKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Deutschland, johanning.kai@mh-hannover.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The haemostasiological management of patients with multiple injuries requires rapid and adequate therapy decisions due to the highly dynamic surroundings. For this, diagnostic techniques which have the ability to detect and differentiate coagulation disorders that are commonly present in multiple trauma patients are necessary. Widely used routine coagulation tests (e.g., aPTT or PT) sensitively measure impairments of the intrinsic or extrinsic pathway, but without further identification or differentiation. Important influencing parameters like acidosis, hypothermia, fibrinolysis or polymerization dysfunction but especially the clot quality are not detectable. Moreover, the turn around times of these tests are about 30-60 min. However, thrombelastography measures clot strength and stability in whole blood under the present conditions of the injured patient. Impairments of clot quality can be differentiated. Because of the visualization of the clot formation, a patient's coagulation capacity can be assessed within minutes. Admittedly the use of these point-of-care devices in the operation theatre requires human and temporal resources.

Indexed as

Blood Coagulation DisordersBlood Coagulation TestsEmergency Medical ServicesGermanyHematologyHumansMultiple TraumaPoint-of-Care SystemsPractice Guidelines as TopicReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.