↓ Skip to main content

Safety, acceptability and tolerability of uncoated and excipient-coated high density silicon micro-projection array patches in human subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Vaccine, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety, acceptability and tolerability of uncoated and excipient-coated high density silicon micro-projection array patches in human subjects
Published in
Vaccine, October 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.10.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Griffin, Suzanne Elliott, Kenia Krauer, Cristyn Davies, S. Rachel Skinner, Christopher D. Anderson, Angus Forster

Abstract

Most vaccinations are performed by intramuscular injection with a needle and syringe. However, this method is not ideal due to limitations, such as the risk of needle-stick injury, the requirement for trained personnel to give injections and the need to reconstitute lyophilized vaccines. Therefore, we tested an alternative delivery technology that overcomes the problems with needle and syringe. The Nanopatch™ is an array of 10,000 silicon micro-projections per cm(2) that can be dry-coated with vaccine for skin delivery. The high number and density of micro-projections means that high velocity application is required to achieve consistent skin penetration. Before clinically testing a vaccine Nanopatch, this study tests the safety, tolerability and acceptability/utility of uncoated and excipient-coated Nanopatches in healthy adults. Nanopatches were applied to skin of the upper arm and volar forearm and left in contact with the skin for two minutes before removal. The application sites were assessed for local skin response over 28 days. Acceptability interviews were also performed. No unexpected adverse events directly related to the Nanopatch application were reported. All applications of the Nanopatch resulted in an expected erythema response which faded between days 3 and 7. In some subjects, some skin discolouration was visible for several days or up to 3 weeks after application. The majority (83%) of subjects reported a preference for the Nanopatch compared to the needle and syringe and found the application process to be simple and acceptable. On a pain scale from 0 to 10, 78% of applications were scored "0" (no pain) with the average scores for less than 1. The results from this study demonstrate the feasibility of the Nanopatch to improve vaccination by showing that application of the product without vaccine to human skin is safe, tolerable and preferred to needle and syringe administration. Clinical trial registry ID: ACTRN1261500083549.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 17%
Researcher 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 22 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 13%
Engineering 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 27 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 November 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Vaccine
#13,219
of 16,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,316
of 338,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vaccine
#158
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 338,323 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 243 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.