↓ Skip to main content

Usefulness of screening tools in the evaluation of long-term effectiveness of DREZ lesioning in the treatment of neuropathic pain after brachial plexus injury

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, December 2014
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
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Usefulness of screening tools in the evaluation of long-term effectiveness of DREZ lesioning in the treatment of neuropathic pain after brachial plexus injury
Published in
BMC Neurology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12883-014-0225-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pavel Haninec, Radek Kaiser, Libor Mencl, Petr Waldauf

Abstract

BackgroundDespite high success rate of DREZ lesioning in the treatment of intractable central pain, there is still a significant incidence of patients without satisfactory post-operative effect. The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term effect of DREZ lesioning using both a subjective assessment using a visual analog scale (VAS) to quantify residual pain and an assessment using the screening tool (painDETECT Questionnaire, PD-Q).MethodsDREZ lesioning was performed in 52 patients from a total 441 cases with brachial plexus injury (11.8%) during a 17-year period (1995¿2011). The effect of surgery was retrospectively assessed in 48 patients.ResultsA decrease in pre-operative pain by more than 75% (Group I) was achieved in 70.8% of patients and another 20.8% reported significant improvement (Group II). The surgery was unsucessful in 8.4% (Group III). We found a significant correlation between `improvement¿ groups from both methods of assessments. Patients from Group I usually complained of residual nociceptive pain according to PD-Q, patients from Group II typically had pain of unclear origin, and all cases those in Group III suffered from neuropathic pain, Cramer¿s V = .66, P < .001. Overall, 66.7% of patients had resolved neuropathic pain, 20.8% patients had more serious complaints and may also suffer from residual neuropathic pain, while 12.5% had unresolved neuropathic pain.ConclusionDREZ lesioning is a safe and effective method with success rates of about 90%. PD-Q scores correspond to subjective satisfaction with the surgery and it seems to be a suitable screening tool for finding patients with residual neuropathic pain after surgery.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 16%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Neuroscience 3 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 6 24%
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 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#14,792,181
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,352
of 2,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,948
of 361,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#14
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 361,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.