| Title |
Evidence‐Based Management of Pain After Excisional Haemorrhoidectomy Surgery: A PROSPECT Review Update
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-016-3737-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tarik Sammour, Ahmed W. H. Barazanchi, Andrew G. Hill, PROSPECT group, Francis Bonnet, Barrie Fischer, Girish Joshi, Henrik Kehlet, Philipp Lirk, Narinder Rawal, Stephan Schug, Marc Van de Velde, Marcel Vercauteren |
| Abstract |
The aim of this systematic review was to update previous PROSPECT ( http://www.postoppain.org ) review recommendations for the management of pain after excisional haemorrhoidectomy. Randomized studies and reviews published in the English language from July 2006 (end date of last review) to March 2016, assessing analgesic, anaesthetic, and operative interventions pertaining to excisional haemorrhoidectomy in adults, and reporting pain scores, were retrieved from the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. An additional 464 studies were identified of which 74 met the inclusion criteria. There were 48 randomized controlled trials and 26 reviews. Quantitative analyses were not performed, as there were limited numbers of trials with a sufficiently homogeneous design. Pudendal nerve block, with or without general anaesthesia, is recommended for all patients undergoing haemorrhoidal surgery. Either closed haemorrhoidectomy, or open haemorrhoidectomy with electrocoagulation of the pedicle is recommended as the primary procedure. Combinations of analgesics (paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids), topical lignocaine and glyceryl trinitrate, laxatives, and oral metronidazole are recommended post-operatively. The recommendations are largely based on single intervention, not multimodal intervention, studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 20% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Turkey | 1 | 7% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 7% |
| Paraguay | 1 | 7% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 21% |
| Unknown | 23 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 09 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,787,510
of 25,603,577 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#357
of 4,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,864
of 323,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#15
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,603,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 323,552 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.