↓ Skip to main content

Interventional management of hyperhidrosis in secondary care: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Dermatology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Interventional management of hyperhidrosis in secondary care: a systematic review
Published in
British Journal of Dermatology, June 2018
DOI 10.1111/bjd.16558
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Wade, A. Llewellyn, J. Jones‐Diette, K. Wright, S. Rice, A.M. Layton, N.J. Levell, D. Craig, N. Woolacott

Abstract

Hyperhidrosis is uncontrollable excessive sweating, which occurs at rest, regardless of temperature. The symptoms of hyperhidrosis can significantly affect quality of life. To undertake a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and safety of treatments available in secondary care for the management of primary hyperhidrosis. Fifteen databases (including trial registers) were searched to July 2016 to identify studies of secondary care treatments for primary hyperhidrosis. For each intervention randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included, where available; where RCT evidence was lacking, non-randomised trials or large prospective case series were included. Outcomes of interest included disease severity, sweat rate, quality of life, patient satisfaction and adverse events. Trial quality was assessed using a modified version of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were pooled in pair-wise meta-analyses where appropriate, otherwise a narrative synthesis was presented. Fifty studies were included in the review; 32 RCTs, 17 non-randomised trials and one case series. Studies varied in terms of population, intervention and methods of outcome assessment. Most studies were small, at high risk of bias and poorly reported. The interventions assessed were iontophoresis, botulinum toxin injections (BTX), anticholinergic medications, curettage and newer energy-based technologies that damage the sweat gland. The evidence for the effectiveness and safety of treatments for primary hyperhidrosis is limited overall, and few firm conclusions can be drawn. However, there is moderate quality evidence to support the use of BTX for axillary hyperhidrosis. A trial comparing BTX with iontophoresis for palmar hyperhidrosis is warranted. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 25 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 29 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 30 June 2020.
All research outputs
#6,498,682
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Dermatology
#2,702
of 9,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,475
of 343,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Dermatology
#45
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 343,092 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.