↓ Skip to main content

The Use of Botulinum Toxin Injections to Manage Drooling in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis/Motor Neurone Disease: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
patent
12 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
The Use of Botulinum Toxin Injections to Manage Drooling in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis/Motor Neurone Disease: A Systematic Review
Published in
Dysphagia, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00455-014-9535-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nina Squires, Miles Humberstone, Adrian Wills, Antony Arthur

Abstract

Difficulty in managing oral secretions is commonly experienced by patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)/motor neurone disease (MND) and associated bulbar weakness including dysphagia. There are no definitive evidence-based treatment guidelines to manage the distressing symptom of drooling. We reviewed the evidence for the effectiveness of botulinum toxin injections to reduce saliva in ALS/MND. The search strategy was conducted in four stages: (1) electronic search of relevant databases, (2) hand searches of all international ALS/MND symposium journals, (3) email request to MND care centres in the UK and Ireland, and (4) hand searching of reference lists. All studies were critically appraised and relevant data extracted. Botulinum toxin type A and type B were analysed separately. Due to heterogeneity, it was not possible to calculate a pooled estimate of effect. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria (9 for type A and 3 for type B). Only two randomised controlled trials were identified. Study sample sizes were small with a mean of 12.5 subjects. The most frequently reported outcomes were weight of cotton rolls and number of tissues used. All studies claimed the intervention tested was effective, but only seven studies (4 for type A and 3 for type B) reported statistically significant differences. Although there is evidence to suggest that botulinum toxin B can reduce drooling, the evidence base is limited by a lack of randomized controlled trials. Evidence to support the use of botulinum toxin A is weaker. Larger trials will help remove the uncertainty practitioners face in treating this disabling symptom.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 19 26%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Linguistics 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 March 2024.
All research outputs
#3,366,401
of 23,839,820 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia
#235
of 1,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,819
of 228,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,839,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 228,237 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 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.