↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy and tolerance of enzymatic hydrolysed collagen (EHC) vs. glucosamine sulphate (GS) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA)

Overview of attention for article published in International Orthopaedics, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 1,481)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy and tolerance of enzymatic hydrolysed collagen (EHC) vs. glucosamine sulphate (GS) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA)
Published in
International Orthopaedics, April 2010
DOI 10.1007/s00264-010-1010-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomáš Trč, Jana Bohmová

Abstract

This was a 13-week, multicentre, randomised, parallel, double-blind study. One hundred men and women volunteers aged ≥ 40 years with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) were randomised to once daily enzymatic hydrolysed collagen (EHC) 10 g or glucosamine sulphate (GS) 1.5 g for 90 consecutive days. Follow-up took place after two weeks and after one, two and three months. Primary [visual analogue scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC Index)] and secondary outcomes variables, assessed at weeks two, four, eight and 12, were KOA pain intensity measured by quadruple visual analogue scales in the target knee, the WOMAC total score index, patient's and investigator's global assessments of disease activity, joint assessment, use of rescue medication (ibuprofen 400 mg tablets) and assessment of Quality of Life index (SF-36 Questionnaire). Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Clear improvement was observed in both joint pain and symptoms in patients with KOA treated with EHC (Colatech®) and significant differences were observed. Mean reductions from baseline for EHC 10 g daily and GS 1.5 g, respectively, were KOA pain intensity reduction in the target knee for Colatech® (p < 0.05): WOMAC index decrease ≤ 15 points at the last visit (day 90) for Colatech® in 16 patients (34.04%) (p < 0.05) and for glucosamine in six patients (13.04%); total score index for painful joints: Colatech® 1.6 (p < 0.05) and glucosamine 1.8; total score index for swollen joints: Colatech® 0.5 (p < 0.05) and glucosamine 0.7; patient's global assessment of efficacy as the sum of improvement good + ideal: 80.8% for Colatech® and 46.6% for glucosamine (p < 0.05). EHC (Colatech®) showed superior improvement over GS in the SF-36 Questionnaire in the Physical Health Index (42.0 for Colatech and 40.0 for glucosamine). The incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups. Both EHC and GS were well tolerated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 145 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Researcher 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 9 6%
Other 29 20%
Unknown 42 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 49 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 03 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,416,078
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#24
of 1,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,673
of 95,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,481 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 95,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 94% of its contemporaries.