↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Rocuronium versus succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction intubation

Overview of attention for article published in this source, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

3 blogs
9 tweeters
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

145 Mendeley
Rocuronium versus succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction intubation
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, April 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002788.pub2
Pubmed ID

Perry, Jeffrey J, Lee, Jacques S, Sillberg, Victoria AH, Wells, George A


Patients requiring emergency endotracheal intubation often require a rapid sequence induction (RSI) intubation technique to protect against aspiration or increased intracranial pressure, or to facilitate intubation. Succinylcholine is the most commonly used muscle relaxant because of its fast onset and short duration; unfortunately, it can have serious side effects. Rocuronium has been suggested as an alternative to succinylcholine for intubation. This meta-analysis is an update since our initial Cochrane systematic review in 2003.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 4 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Italy 2 1%
United States 2 1%
South Africa 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 130 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 27 19%
Researcher 26 18%
Student > Postgraduate 23 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 8%
Student > Master 10 7%
Other 37 26%
Unknown 11 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 80%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 2 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 12 8%