Eugene R Viscusi

Thomas Jefferson University, Filadelfia, Pennsylvania, United States

Are you Eugene R Viscusi?

Claim your profile

Publications (95)242.6 Total impact

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is concern that neuraxial anesthesia in patients undergoing surgery for treatment of a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) may increase the risk of having a central nervous system infection develop. However, the available data on this topic are limited and contradictory. We wished to determine whether neuraxial anesthesia (1) is associated with central nervous system infections in patients undergoing surgery for a PJI, and (2) increases the likelihood of systemic infection in these patients. All 539 patients who received neuraxial or general anesthesia during 1499 surgeries for PJI from October 2000 to May 2013 were included in this study; of these, 51% (n = 764) of the surgeries were performed in 134 patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia and 49% were performed in 143 patients receiving general anesthesia. Two hundred sixty-two patients received general and neuraxial anesthesia during different surgeries. We used the International Classification of Diseases, 9(th) Revision codes and the medical records to identify patients who had an intraspinal abscess or meningitis develop after surgery for a PJI. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the effect of type of anesthesia (neuraxial versus general) on postoperative complications. There were no cases of meningitis, but one epidural abscess developed in a patient after neuraxial anesthesia. This patient underwent six revision surgeries during a 42-day period. Patients who received neuraxial anesthesia had lower odds of systemic infections (4% versus 12%; odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 023-054; p < 0.001). Central nervous system infections after neuraxial anesthesia in patients with a PJI appear to be exceedingly rare. Based on the findings of this study, it may be time for the anesthesiology community to reevaluate the risk of sepsis as a relative contraindication to the use of neuraxial anesthesia. Level III, therapeutic study.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s11999-015-4175-3 · 2.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Successful implementation of an acute pain management service involves a team approach in which team members have clearly defined roles. Clinical protocols are designed to help address common problems and prevent errors. As the complexity of surgery and patients' diseases continues to increase, current knowledge of new analgesic medications, acute pain literature, and skills in regional anesthesia techniques is imperative. Emphasizing a multimodal approach can improve analgesia and decrease opioid-related side effects. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Anesthesiology Clinics 12/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.anclin.2014.08.008
  • Jaime L Baratta, Eric S Schwenk, Eugene R Viscusi
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Uncontrolled postoperative pain may result in significant clinical, psychological, and socioeconomic consequences. Not only does inadequate pain management following surgery result in increased morbidity and mortality but it also may delay recovery, result in unanticipated readmissions, decrease patient satisfaction, and lead to chronic persistent postsurgical pain. Pain is multifactorial in nature, and understanding both the complexity of pain and its side effects is imperative to achieving a successful surgical outcome. In this section, we review the consequences of pain as they pertain to plastic surgery with a focus on the impact of pain on the surgical stress response and risk of wound infections and the effect of improved pain control on flap surgery. Uncontrolled acute postoperative pain may lead to chronic persistent postsurgical pain, which has a high incidence in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. To achieve optimal postoperative analgesia, one must recognize the barriers to effective pain management, including both physician/nursing-related barriers and patient-related barriers, as well as the increasingly common appearance of opioid-tolerant patients.
    Plastic &amp Reconstructive Surgery 10/2014; 134(4S-2 Current Concepts in Pain Management in Plastic Surgery):15S-21S. DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000000681 · 3.33 Impact Factor
  • Charles E Argoff, Eugene R Viscusi
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic noncancer pain is common and consequential, affecting ∼100 million people in the United States alone and costing, when direct and indirect costs are combined, in excess of $635 billion. For certain individuals, opioids may be an effective option for the management of chronic pain; however, a series of critical decisions must be made before prescribing opioids to ensure that their potential benefits and possible risks are appropriately and realistically addressed. A thorough history, physical examination, and appropriate testing, including an assessment of risk for substance abuse, misuse, or addiction, should be conducted in patients who are being considered for opioid therapy. Proactively developing a treatment plan that matches the needs and expectations of the patient, while minimizing the potential for substance abuse, is central to the success of pain management. Current standard of care suggests that for most patients, a trial of nonopioid therapies should generally be tried first. There is no single opioid of choice that universally provides the best outcomes for all patients; thus, it is critical for the health-care practitioner to become familiar with the available subclasses, formulations, and modes of administration, and base the treatment plan on clinical experience with the drug, prior patient experience, the availability of the formulation, and cost and coverage. Pain is a dynamic phenomenon in that its characteristics and response to treatment evolve over time, as does the patient's general health state. Both positive and negative changes over time may necessitate a change in medication. Opioids can be prescribed safely and effectively, and when used with appropriate attention to individual patient characteristics may have a positive impact on pain and function. When contemplating initiation of opioid analgesics, clinicians would do well to make it clear to their patient that they will be prescribed on a trial basis with a clear exit strategy for discontinuing such treatment if there is no clear benefit including lack of analgesia, insurmountable adverse effects, and/or frank misuse or abuse of the prescribed drug.
    The American Journal of Gastroenterology 09/2014; 2(1):3-8. DOI:10.1038/ajgsup.2014.3 · 9.21 Impact Factor
  • David A Provenzano, Eugene R Viscusi
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective: Opioid analgesics are commonly and increasingly prescribed by physicians for the management of chronic pain. However, strong evidence supports the need for strategies that reduce opioid use. The objective of this review is to outline limitations associated with opioid use and discuss therapeutic techniques that can be adopted to optimize the use of opioids in the management of chronic pain. Scope: Literature searches through MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were used to identify relevant journal articles. The search was limited to articles published from January 1980 to January 2014. Additional references were obtained from articles extracted during the database search. Relevant search terms included opioid, opioid abuse, chronic pain management, written care agreements, urine drug testing, and multimodal therapy. Findings: Opioids exhibit a well-established abuse potential and evidence supporting the efficacy of opioids in chronic pain management is limited. In addition, opioid exposure is associated with adverse effects on multiple organ systems. Effective strategies designed to mitigate opioid abuse and diversion and optimize clinical outcomes should be employed. Conclusions: Appropriate patient selection through identification of risk factors, urine drug testing, and access to prescription monitoring programs has been shown to effectively improve care. Structured opioid therapy in a multimodal platform including use of a low initial dose, prescription of alternative non-opioid analgesics including non-steroidal inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen, as well as development of written care agreements to individualize and guide therapy has also been shown to improve patient outcomes. Implementation of opioid allocation strategies has the potential to encourage appropriate opioid use and improve patient care.
    Current Medical Research and Opinion 05/2014; 30(10). DOI:10.1185/03007995.2014.921610 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Recently, multimodal pain control has been used to manage postoperative pain in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This approach combines numerous modalities, such as opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, local anesthetics, and acetaminophen, in an effort to reduce overall opioid consumption and also to provide better pain control. Gabapentinoids are a class of drugs that have been used as part of multimodal approach, and may be effective in patients who are previous users of chronic pain medication. The hypothesis of this study was that the addition of pregabalin reduces opioid consumption and/or improves pain after TKA, even in patients who are previous users of chronic pain medications. Methods: Using a prospectively collected database, 262 consecutive patients undergoing primary TKA between December 2011 and April 2012 were identified who received multimodal analgesia after surgery that included pregabalin. Using the same database, these patients were compared with 268 patients undergoing TKA from January to December 2010 who also received multimodal analgesia but were not given pregabalin. The clinical records of these patients were reviewed in detail to determine the incidence and nature of postoperative complications, opioid consumption, and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores. Results: The incidence of respiratory, renal, and hemodynamic complications was significantly lower in the patients who received pregabalin. Gastrointestinal complications, which included nausea, were not significantly different between the groups. Patients receiving pregabalin had a lower average opioid consumption, and their minimum and maximum levels of opioid consumption were also reduced. Previous users of chronic pain medications had higher VAS scores but the same opioid consumption compared with those who were not previous users of chronic pain medications. No difference was seen in the maximum VAS scores between patients who received pregabalin and those who did not. Conclusion: Pregabalin in the context of multimodal pain management may be associated with reduced opioid consumption and other medical complications in patients undergoing TKA, including previous users of chronic pain medications.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine 05/2014; 42(2):10-8. DOI:10.3810/psm.2014.05.2053 · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inadequate control of postoperative pain after orthopedic procedures may trigger complications that increase morbidity. Multimodal analgesia is used to manage pain effectively after surgical procedures and reduce the need for rescue analgesia. Intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (OFIRMEV; Cadence Pharmaceuticals, Inc.), an analgesic that has been studied and used in the multimodal management of acute pain after major orthopedic procedures, combines the safety seen with oral and rectal formulations with a preferred route of administration. Two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials were conducted (total 130 patients) to determine the efficacy and safety of single-dose IV acetaminophen in patients following total hip arthroplasty. Although both studies were stopped prematurely, overlap in patient populations, study design, and methodologies in the single-dose phase of these studies allowed for analysis of their results to be presented concurrently. Both trials demonstrated IV acetaminophen having greater efficacy than placebo in terms of primary endpoints [pain intensity differences from T0.5 to T3 (P < 0.05 in both studies)]. The use of IV acetaminophen also reduced the need for rescue opioid consumption, with patients receiving IV acetaminophen consuming, on average, less than half the amount of rescue medication as those receiving placebo. IV acetaminophen was effective in treating moderate-to-severe pain after total hip arthroplasty and reduced the need for rescue opioid consumption.
    American journal of therapeutics 01/2014; 22(1). DOI:10.1097/MJT.0000000000000026 · 1.29 Impact Factor
  • Jaime L Baratta, Kishor Gandhi, Eugene R Viscusi
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pain management following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be challenging. Inadequate pain management following TKA may inhibit rehabilitation, increase morbidity and mortality, decrease patient satisfaction, and lead to chronic persistent postsurgical pain. Traditionally the mainstay of postoperative pain management was opioids; however, the current recommendations to pain management emphasize a multimodal approach and minimizing opioids whenever possible. With careful planning and a multimodal analgesic approach instituted perioperatively, appropriate pain management following TKA can be achieved. Utilizing an extensive review of the literature, this article discusses the analgesic techniques available for the perioperative management of TKA.
    Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances 01/2014; 23(1):22-36. DOI:10.3113/JSOA.2014.0022
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Optimal postoperative pain management is important to ensure patient comfort and early mobilization. In this double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated postoperative pain following knee replacement in patients receiving placebo, etoricoxib (90 or 120 mg), or ibuprofen 1800 mg daily for 7 days. Patients >=18 years of age who had pain at rest >=5 (0--10 Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]) after unilateral total knee replacement were randomly assigned to placebo (N = 98), etoricoxib 90 mg (N = 224), etoricoxib 120 mg (N = 230), or ibuprofen 1800 mg (N = 224) postoperatively. Co-primary endpoints included Average Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1--3 (0- to 10-point NRS) and Average Total Daily Dose of Morphine over Days 1--3. Pain upon movement was evaluated using Average Pain Intensity Difference upon Knee Flexion (0- to 10-point NRS). The primary objective was to demonstrate analgesic superiority for the etoricoxib doses vs. placebo; the secondary objective was to demonstrate that the analgesic effect of the etoricoxib doses was non-inferior to ibuprofen. Adverse experiences (AEs) including opioid-related AEs were evaluated. The least squares (LS) mean (95% CI) differences from placebo for Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1--3 were -0.54 (-0.95, -0.14); -0.49 (-0.89, -0.08); and -0.45 (-0.85, -0.04) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.05 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Geometric Mean Ratio morphine use over Days 1--3 from placebo were 0.66 (0.54, 0.82); 0.69 (0.56, 0.85); and 0.66 (0.53, 0.81) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.001 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Mean Pain Intensity upon Knee Flexion were -0.37 (-0.85, 0.11); -0.46 (-0.94, 0.01); and -0.42 (-0.90, 0.06) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. Opioid-related AEs occurred in 41.8%, 34.7%, 36.5%, and 36.3% of patients on placebo, etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. Postoperative use of etoricoxib 90 and 120 mg in patients undergoing total knee replacement is both superior to placebo and non-inferior to ibuprofen in reducing pain at rest and also reduces opioid (morphine) consumption.Clinical trial registration: NCT00820027.
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 10/2013; 14(1):300. DOI:10.1186/1471-2474-14-300 · 1.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • Jaime L Baratta, Kishor Gandhi, Eugene R Viscusi
    Evidence-based nursing 07/2013; DOI:10.1136/eb-2013-101421
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:: Pooled safety data from 10 randomized, double-blind studies of liposome bupivacaine, a novel local analgesic formulation, were examined. METHODS:: Eight hundred twenty-three patients received liposome bupivacaine (dose, 66 to 532 mg) given locally at the surgical site in 5 different settings (hemorrhoidectomy, bunionectomy, breast augmentation, total knee arthroplasty, and hernia repair); 446 received bupivacaine HCl (dose, 75 to 200 mg) and 190 received placebo. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored for up to 36 days after administration. RESULTS:: Overall, 48% of patients were men and 21% were 65 years and older. Incidence of AEs was 62% for patients receiving liposome bupivacaine, versus 75% and 43% for patients receiving bupivacaine HCl and placebo, respectively. The most common AEs (incidence >10%) in the liposome bupivacaine arms were nausea, constipation, and vomiting. One death was reported in the liposome bupivacaine group and 1 in the bupivacaine HCl group; both deemed unrelated to study drug. Serious AEs were reported in 2.7% of patients receiving liposome bupivacaine, versus 5.4% and 1.1% of those receiving bupivacaine HCl and placebo, respectively. In both the liposome bupivacaine and bupivacaine HCl groups, 6% of patients experienced a cardiac AE; these were primarily tachycardia (4% vs. 5%, respectively) and bradycardia (2% vs. 1%, respectively). Overall incidence of treatment-related cardiac AEs was <1%; all were associated with liposome bupivacaine. All of these events were assessed by investigators as possibly related to study drug; all were mild or moderate in severity, and none required therapeutic intervention. DISCUSSION:: Liposome bupivacaine exhibited acceptable tolerability across 823 patient exposures.
    The Clinical journal of pain 02/2013; 30(2). DOI:10.1097/AJP.0b013e318288e1f6 · 2.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Eric S Schwenk, Kishor Gandhi, Eugene R Viscusi
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Interscalene nerve block impairs ipsilateral lung function and is relatively contraindicated for patients with lung impairment. We present a case of an 89-year-old female smoker with prior left lung lower lobectomy and mild to moderate lung disease who presented for right shoulder arthroplasty and insisted on regional anesthesia. The patient received a multimodal perioperative regimen that consisted of a continuous interscalene block, acetaminophen, ketorolac, and opioids. Surgery proceeded uneventfully and postoperative analgesia was excellent. Pulmonary physiology and management of these patients will be discussed. A risk/benefit discussion should occur with patients having impaired lung function before performance of interscalene blocks. In this particular patient with mild to moderate disease, analgesia was well managed through a multimodal approach including a continuous interscalene block, and close monitoring of respiratory status took place throughout the perioperative period, leading to a successful outcome.
    01/2013; 2013:986386. DOI:10.1155/2013/986386
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetics, sensory/motor effects, and safety of epidurally administered liposome bupivacaine versus bupivacaine HCl in healthy volunteers. Thirty subjects were randomized to receive liposome bupivacaine 89, 155, or 266 mg, or bupivacaine HCl 50 mg in a double-blind fashion. Occurrence/duration of motor blockade, pinprick/cold sensitivity, and plasma bupivacaine levels were assessed for 96 hours after study drug administration. Tolerability parameters were also assessed. All doses of liposome bupivacaine resulted in greater area under the curve and a longer time to observed maximum plasma concentration and terminal elimination half-life than bupivacaine HCl 50 mg. Mean maximum plasma concentration with liposome bupivacaine 89 and 155 mg (but not 266 mg) was statistically significantly lower than with bupivacaine HCl 50 mg (P < 0.001). Median duration of motor blockade with liposome bupivacaine 266 mg was 1 hour versus 2.8 hours for bupivacaine HCl. Of subjects who received liposome bupivacaine 266 mg, 29% (2/7) were unable to ambulate at 4 hours postdose versus 67% (4/6) of those receiving bupivacaine HCl. Median durations of pinprick/cold sensitivity loss were 36 and 69 hours, respectively, in the liposome bupivacaine 266-mg group versus 12 hours for both pinprick and cold in the bupivacaine HCl group. Liposome bupivacaine was well tolerated; the most common adverse event in all treatment groups was injection site pain, which resolved within 30 days for most subjects. Epidurally administered liposome bupivacaine 266 mg resulted in a longer duration of sensory blockade than liposome bupivacaine 89 or 155 mg or bupivacaine HCl 50 mg. Duration of motor blockade was shorter with liposome bupivacaine 266 mg versus bupivacaine HCl.
    Regional anesthesia and pain medicine 10/2012; 37(6):616-22. DOI:10.1097/AAP.0b013e318269d29e · 4.16 Impact Factor
  • Eugene R Viscusi
    10/2012; 40(4):64-5. DOI:10.3810/hp.2012.10.1005
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pain management in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) is continually evolving, with several new nonopioids expanding the list of available agents. Pain in the PACU is not an inevitable outcome of surgery. With careful planning, multimodal analgesic techniques instituted preoperatively will reduce pain in the PACU. Accurate assessment of the characteristics of pain will direct rational drug choices while minimizing side effects. Better management of pain in the PACU setting will likely improve patient satisfaction and facilitate shorter PACU stays.
    Anesthesiology Clinics 09/2012; 30(3):e1-15. DOI:10.1016/j.anclin.2012.09.001
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the effects of two different doses of etoricoxib delivered perioperatively compared with placebo and standard pain management on pain at rest, pain with mobilization, and use of additional morphine/opioids postoperatively. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated postoperative pain following total abdominal hysterectomy over 5 days in patients receiving placebo or etoricoxib administered 90 min prior to surgery and continuing postoperatively. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (n = 144), etoricoxib 90 mg/day (n = 142), or etoricoxib 120 mg/day (n = 144). Average Pain Intensity at Rest over days 1-3 (0- to 10-point numerical rating scale [NRS]) was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary endpoints included Average Pain Intensity upon Sitting, Standing, and Walking over days 1-3 (0- to 10-point NRS) as well as Average Total Daily Dose of Morphine over days 1-3. This trial is registered on (NCT00788710). The least squares (LS) means (95% CI) for the primary endpoint were 3.26 (2.96, 3.55); 2.46 (2.16, 2.76); and 2.40 (2.11, 2.69) for placebo, etoricoxib 90 mg, and etoricoxib 120 mg, respectively, significantly different for both etoricoxib doses versus placebo (p < 0.001). Patients on etoricoxib 90 mg and 120 mg required ~30% less morphine per day than those on placebo (p < 0.001), which led to more rapid bowel recovery in the active treatment groups by ~10 hours vs. placebo. A greater proportion of patients on etoricoxib (10-30% greater than placebo) achieved mild levels of pain with movement, defined as pain ≤3/10. A key limitation for this study was that movement-evoked pain measurements were not designated as primary endpoints. In patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy, etoricoxib 90 mg and 120 mg dosed preoperatively and then continued postoperatively significantly reduces both resting and movement-related pain, as well as reduced opioid (morphine) consumption that led to more rapid bowel recovery.
    Current Medical Research and Opinion 06/2012; 28(8):1323-35. DOI:10.1185/03007995.2012.707121 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • Eugene R Viscusi, Marco Pappagallo
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the postoperative pain setting, the use of opioid analgesics remains essential in achieving effective analgesia and in avoiding the deleterious sequelae of uncontrolled pain that can worsen patient outcomes. However, postoperative pain remains undertreated in many patients. Choosing the most appropriate use of opioids in the postoperative setting, especially for patients undergoing ongoing opioid treatment for chronic pain, can pose daunting challenges for many clinicians. In this article, we examine the pitfalls that may be encountered when implementing postoperative pain management strategies with opioid analgesics, especially in patients receiving chronic opioid therapy prior to admission, and the critical steps for appropriate and effective analgesia in this setting.
    02/2012; 40(1):149-59. DOI:10.3810/hp.2012.02.955
  • Kenneth Bramlett, Erol Onel, Eugene R Viscusi, Kevin Jones
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: DepoFoam bupivacaine is a novel liposomal formulation of bupivacaine designed to provide prolonged postsurgical analgesia. This dose-ranging study evaluated extent and duration of analgesia following administration of DepoFoam bupivacaine in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of DepoFoam bupivacaine doses of 133, 266, 399, or 532 mg were compared with bupivacaine HCl (150 mg) with epinephrine given as single injections via wound infiltration in TKA patients (N=138). Primary efficacy measure was AUC of pain intensity scores assessed by numeric rating scale with activity (NRS-A) through Day 4 postsurgery. Other assessments included pain intensity at rest (NRS-R), postsurgical opioid consumption, and safety, among others. Mean AUC of NRS-A scores through Day 4 were 20.7, 19.5, 18.8, and 19.1 for the 133-mg, 266-mg, 399-mg, and 532-mg DepoFoam bupivacaine groups vs 20.4 for bupivacaine HCl. With DepoFoam bupivacaine 532-mg, differences in NRS-R scores reached statistical significance (P<0.05) vs bupivacaine HCl on Days 1 and 5 and mean AUC NRS-R scores were significantly lower through Days 2-5; a dose-response trend was demonstrated. Mean rating for blinded care provider's satisfaction with analgesia was significantly higher for DepoFoam bupivacaine 532 mg vs bupivacaine HCl (P ≤ 0.05). Other efficacy measures showed no statistically significant differences. Exposure to bupivacaine increased in a dose-related manner, as reflected by mean and maximum plasma bupivacaine concentrations, and AUC(0-∞). Treatment with DepoFoam bupivacaine 532 mg was associated with statistically significantly greater analgesia while patients were at rest after surgery compared with bupivacaine HCl.
    The Knee 01/2012; 19(5):530-6. DOI:10.1016/j.knee.2011.12.004 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Spencer S Liu, Asokumar Buvanendran, Eugene R Viscusi
    Regional anesthesia and pain medicine 11/2011; 36(6):632-3. DOI:10.1097/AAP.0b013e31822d0dc3 · 4.16 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

1k Citations
242.60 Total Impact Points


  • 2004–2014
    • Thomas Jefferson University
      • Department of Anesthesiology
      Filadelfia, Pennsylvania, United States
    • University of Toronto
      Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    • Jefferson College
      Хиллсборо, Missouri, United States
    • Duke University Medical Center
      • Department of Anesthesiology
      Durham, North Carolina, United States
    • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
      • Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management
      Dallas, Texas, United States
  • 2010–2013
    • Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals
      • Department of Anesthesiology
      Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
  • 2011
    • Philadelphia University
      New York, New York, United States
  • 2006
    • Loma Linda University
      • Department of Anesthesiology
      Loma Linda, California, United States
  • 2005
    • Duke University
      • Department of Anesthesiology
      Durham, North Carolina, United States